Multiparameter evidence synthesis in epidemiology and medical decision-making

Ades, A. E., & Sutton, A. J. (2006). Multiparameter evidence synthesis in epidemiology and medical decision-making: current approaches. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 169(1), 5-35.

Type

Journal article

Intellectual base

Review or monograph

Year

2006

Volume

169

Issue

1

Pages

5-35

ISSN

1467-985X

DOI

10.1111/j.1467-985x.2005.00377.x

DOI registrant

Oxford University Press

Link

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2005.00377.x

Cited from

statistics_experimental_design

Cited by

1 citation across 1 artifact.

Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.

Primes

• Bayesian Updating
  • In epidemiology, Bayesian evidence synthesis combines trial data, observational studies, and expert priors to estimate public health parameters

    This sourceReviews Bayesian frameworks for combining trial data, observational studies, and expert priors to estimate public-health parameters. SUPPORTS marker 010 (re-sourced from schervish-1995, a general theory text that did not back the epi-synthesis claim).

    Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract

    This review's abstract supports Bayesian-style synthesis that combines evidence across different study designs in epidemiology, but it never states the role of expert priors or of estimating public-health parameters.

    “Alongside the development of meta-analysis as a tool for summarizing research literature, there is renewed interest in broader forms of quantitative synthesis that are aimed at combining evidence from different study designs or evidence on multiple parameters.”

    Read by an automated reader; not a human review. How support was checked

Verification

Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.

Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.

Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.

See how references were verified.

Registry ID ref:05101f8c6c31 · see in the full table