2013
DOI: 10.1161/circulationaha.113.003193
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bayesian Methods for Evidence Evaluation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 12 publications
(12 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Such an approach would assign less weight to study design types that are more susceptible to bias (e.g., observational designs) relative to RCT designs. Empirically, these weights might be developed via meta-regression examining how effect estimates vary by study design, as has been suggested previously [ 21 ]. Additionally, expert judgments may be elicited via survey or using a Delphi or group consensus approach, where this information may be quantified in the form of a prior probability distribution.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such an approach would assign less weight to study design types that are more susceptible to bias (e.g., observational designs) relative to RCT designs. Empirically, these weights might be developed via meta-regression examining how effect estimates vary by study design, as has been suggested previously [ 21 ]. Additionally, expert judgments may be elicited via survey or using a Delphi or group consensus approach, where this information may be quantified in the form of a prior probability distribution.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%