ScholarGate
アシスタント

手法を比較

選択した手法を並べて確認できます。異なる行はハイライト表示されます。

メタアナリシス的ランダム化比較試験×ネットワークメタアナリシス×
分野疫学エビデンス統合
系統Process / pipelineProcess / pipeline
提唱年1976 (Glass coinage of meta-analysis); 1993 (Cochrane Collaboration formalization)2002
提唱者Gene V. Glass (meta-analysis method); Cochrane Collaboration (systematic RCT pooling standards)Lumley (2002)
種類Quantitative evidence-synthesis designMethod
原典Higgins, J. P. T., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M. J., & Welch, V. A. (Eds.). (2019). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN: 978-1119536628Lumley, T. (2002). Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Statistics in Medicine, 21(16), 2313–2324. DOI ↗
別名meta-analytic RCT, MA-RCT, meta-analysis of RCTs, pooled randomized trial analysisMixed Treatment Comparison, MTC, Indirect Comparison Meta-Analysis
関連31
概要A meta-analytic randomized clinical trial is a formal evidence-synthesis method that identifies, appraises, and statistically combines the results of multiple randomized clinical trials addressing the same clinical question. By pooling trial-level data, it produces a single, more precise estimate of treatment effect and quantifies between-trial heterogeneity, sitting at the apex of the evidence hierarchy for evaluating healthcare interventions.Network meta-analysis (NMA) is a systematic method for comparing multiple interventions simultaneously within a single analytical framework, incorporating both direct evidence (head-to-head trials) and indirect evidence (comparisons via common comparators). First formalized by Lumley in 2002, NMA allows researchers to rank treatments and quantify comparative effectiveness even when some treatment pairs have never been directly studied.
ScholarGateデータセット
  1. v1
  2. 2 出典
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 出典
  3. PUBLISHED

検索へ スライドをダウンロード

ScholarGate手法を比較: Meta-analytic Randomized Clinical Trial · Network Meta-Analysis. 2026-06-18に以下より取得 https://scholargate.app/ja/compare