A Comparison of National Guidelines for Network Meta-Analysis

This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:

• Indirect Treatment Comparison/Network Meta-Analysis Study Questionnaire to Assess Relevance and Credibility to Inform Health Care Decision Making: An ISPOR-AMCP-NPC Good Practice Task Force Report
  Value in Health, 2014
• Is network meta-analysis as valid as standard pairwise meta-analysis? It all depends on the distribution of effect modifiers
  BMC Medicine, 2013
• Interpreting Indirect Treatment Comparisons and Network Meta-Analysis for Health-Care Decision Making: Report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: Part 1
  Value in Health, 2011
• AHRQ Series Paper 5: Grading the strength of a body of evidence when comparing medical interventions—Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the Effective Health-Care Program
  Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2010
• Methodological problems in the use of indirect comparisons for evaluating healthcare interventions: survey of published systematic reviews
  BMJ, 2009
• Indirect comparisons: the mesh and mess of clinical trials
  The Lancet, 2006
• Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence
  BMJ, 2005
• Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons
  Statistics in Medicine, 2004
• Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses
  BMJ, 2003
• The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
  Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1997