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。
| 网络荟萃分析× | 元回归× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域≠ | 证据综合 | 荟萃分析 |
| 方法族≠ | Process / pipeline | Regression model |
| 起源年份 | 2002 | 2002 |
| 提出者≠ | Lumley (2002) | Simon Thompson & Julian Higgins |
| 类型≠ | Method | Weighted regression for effect-size heterogeneity |
| 开创性文献≠ | Lumley, T. (2002). Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Statistics in Medicine, 21(16), 2313–2324. DOI ↗ | Thompson, S. G., & Higgins, J. P. T. (2002). How should meta-regression analyses be undertaken and interpreted? Statistics in Medicine, 21(11), 1559–1573. DOI ↗ |
| 别名≠ | Mixed Treatment Comparison, MTC, Indirect Comparison Meta-Analysis | Meta-Analytic Regression, Weighted Regression in Meta-Analysis, Moderator Analysis, Meta-regresyon |
| 相关≠ | 1 | 2 |
| 摘要≠ | 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. | Meta-regression is a statistical technique that extends conventional meta-analysis by regressing study-level effect sizes on one or more study characteristics (moderators) to explain between-study heterogeneity. Formalized by Thompson and Higgins in 2002, it uses weighted least squares — weighting each study by the inverse of its variance — within a mixed-effects framework, allowing researchers to identify which study features systematically account for variation in observed effects across the literature. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|