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。
| 基于方案的荟萃分析× | 网络荟萃分析× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域≠ | 科学计量学 | 证据综合 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 1990s–2015 (Cochrane established 1993; PROSPERO launched 2011; PRISMA-P 2015) | 2002 |
| 提出者≠ | Cochrane Collaboration; formalized through PROSPERO and PRISMA-P initiatives | Lumley (2002) |
| 类型≠ | Evidence synthesis with pre-registered protocol | Method |
| 开创性文献≠ | Higgins, J. P. T., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M. J., & Welch, V. A. (Eds.). (2023). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Version 6.4). Cochrane. link ↗ | Lumley, T. (2002). Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Statistics in Medicine, 21(16), 2313–2324. DOI ↗ |
| 别名≠ | pre-registered meta-analysis, prospective meta-analysis, registered meta-analysis, protocol-driven meta-analysis | Mixed Treatment Comparison, MTC, Indirect Comparison Meta-Analysis |
| 相关≠ | 4 | 1 |
| 摘要≠ | A protocol-based meta-analysis is a meta-analysis conducted according to a detailed, pre-registered protocol that specifies all key methodological decisions — research questions, eligibility criteria, search strategy, outcome measures, and statistical methods — before data collection begins. Pre-registration, typically through PROSPERO or a comparable registry, distinguishes this approach from post-hoc or exploratory meta-analyses and substantially reduces the risk of selective reporting and outcome switching. | 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 ↗ |
|
|