方法对比
并排查看您选择的方法；存在差异的行会高亮显示。
| 荟萃分析I期临床试验× | 网络荟萃分析× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域≠ | 流行病学 | 证据综合 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 2000s–2010s | 2002 |
| 提出者≠ | Neuenschwander, Capkun-Niggli, Branson, Spiegelhalter and colleagues | Lumley (2002) |
| 类型≠ | Bayesian meta-analytic dose-finding design | Method |
| 开创性文献≠ | Neuenschwander, B., Capkun-Niggli, G., Branson, M., & Spiegelhalter, D. J. (2010). Summarizing historical information on controls in clinical trials. Clinical Trials, 7(1), 5–18. DOI ↗ | Lumley, T. (2002). Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Statistics in Medicine, 21(16), 2313–2324. DOI ↗ |
| 别名≠ | meta-analytic dose-finding, MAP prior Phase I, MAPT design, Bayesian meta-analytic Phase I | Mixed Treatment Comparison, MTC, Indirect Comparison Meta-Analysis |
| 相关 | 1 | 1 |
| 摘要≠ | A meta-analytic Phase I clinical trial formally pools evidence from prior Phase I studies — using Bayesian or frequentist meta-analysis — to construct an informative prior (or summary estimate) for dose-toxicity relationships before or during a new first-in-human or early-phase study. The approach increases statistical efficiency, reduces the number of patients exposed to subtherapeutic or toxic doses, and accelerates dose selection by systematically leveraging all relevant historical dose-finding data. | 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数据集 ↗ |
|
|