Cited by 348Meta-analysis and systematic reviewsStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 119 of the 121 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Get real in individual participant data (IPD) meta‐analysis: a review of the methodology

Open access

Debray, Thomas P. A., Moons, Karel G. M., van Valkenhoef, Gert, Efthimiou, Orestis, Hummel, Noemi, Groenwold, Rolf H. H., Reitsma, Johannes B., on behalf of the GetReal methods review group·2015·Research Synthesis Methods

DOI 10.1002/jrsm.1160PMC PMC5042043

Open this paper in CoChat — free account Open PDF

Abstract

Individual participant data (IPD) meta‐analysis is an increasingly used approach for synthesizing and investigating treatment effect estimates. Over the past few years, numerous methods for conducting an IPD meta‐analysis (IPD‐MA) have been proposed, often making different assumptions and modeling choices while addressing a similar research question. We conducted a literature review to provide an overview of methods for performing an IPD‐MA using evidence from clinical trials or non‐randomized studies when investigating treatment efficacy. With this review, we aim to assist researchers in choosing the appropriate methods and provide recommendations on their implementation when planning and conducting an IPD‐MA. © 2015 The Authors. Research Synthesis Methods published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jrsm.1160

Cites

119 of 119 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys
Rubin, D. B. (1987) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/9780470316696 · Cited by 20,701
Multiple imputation: a primer
Schafer, J. L. (1999) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/096228029900800102 · Cited by 3,949
Randomized, Controlled Trials, Observational Studies, and the Hierarchy of Research Designs
Concato, J., Shah, N., & Horwitz, R. I. (2000) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200006223422507 · Cited by 3,563
Review: a gentle introduction to imputation of missing values.
Donders, A. R. T., van der Heijden, G. J. M. G., Stijnen, T., & Moons, K. G. M. (2006) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.01.014 · Cited by 2,582
Self-citation
Enhanced secondary analysis of survival data: reconstructing the data from published Kaplan-Meier survival curves
Guyot, P., Ades, A. E., Ouwens, M., & Welton, N. J. (2012) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-12-9 · Cited by 2,560
Meta-analysis of individual participant data: rationale, conduct, and reporting
Riley, R. D., Lambert, P. C., & Abo-Zaid, G. (2010) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.c221 · Cited by 1,701
Flexible parametric proportional‐hazards and proportional‐odds models for censored survival data, with application to prognostic modelling and estimation of treatment effects
Royston, P. J., & Parmar, M. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1203 · Cited by 1,537
Comparison of Evidence of Treatment Effects in Randomized and Nonrandomized Studies
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2001) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.286.7.821 · Cited by 919
Zero‐Inflated Poisson and Binomial Regression with Random Effects: A Case Study
Hall, D. B. (2000) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.01030.x · Cited by 918
Random effects meta-analysis of event outcome in the framework of the generalized linear mixed model with applications in sparse data
Stijnen, T., Hamza, T. H., & Özdemir, P. (2010) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4040 · Cited by 757
Summing up evidence: one answer is not always enough
Lau, J., Ioannidis, J. P. A., & Schmid, C. H. (1998) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(97)08468-7 · Cited by 655
Extending the simple linear regression model to account for correlated responses: An introduction to generalized estimating equations and multi-level mixed modelling
Burton, P. R., Gurrin, L. C., & Sly, P. D. (1998) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19980615)17:11 · Cited by 629
Recent developments in meta‐analysis
Sutton, A. J., & Higgins, J. P. T. (2007) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.2934 · Cited by 601
The Ethics of Childhood Obesity Treatment - from the Childhood Obesity Task Force (COTF) of European Association for the Study of Obesity (EASO)
Holm, J., Nowicka, P., Farpour‐Lambert, N. J., O’Malley, G., Hassapidou, M. N., Weiss, R., & Baker, J. L. (2014) · Obesity Facts · doi:10.1159/000365773 · Cited by 596
To IPD or not to IPD?
Stewart, L. A., & Tierney, J. F. (2002) · Evaluation & the Health Professions · doi:10.1177/0163278702025001006 · Cited by 591
Meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized trials: a review of methods used in practice
Simmonds, M. C., Higgins, J. P. T., Stewart, L. A., Tierney, J. F., Clarke, M. J., & Thompson, S. G. (2005) · Clinical Trials · doi:10.1191/1740774505cn087oa · Cited by 554
BORROWING STRENGTH FROM EXTERNAL TRIALS IN A META-ANALYSIS
Higgins, J. P. T., & WHITEHEAD, A. (1996) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19961230)15:24 · Cited by 553
The Use of Propensity Scores to Assess the Generalizability of Results from Randomized Trials
Stuart, E. A., Cole, S. R., Bradshaw, C. P., & Leaf, P. J. (2011) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society · doi:10.1111/j.1467-985x.2010.00673.x · Cited by 524
Use of historical control data for assessing treatment effects in clinical trials
Viele, K., Berry, S. M., Neuenschwander, B. E., Amzal, B., Chen, F., Enas, N. H., Hobbs, B. P., Ibrahim, J. G., Kinnersley, N., Lindborg, S. R., et al. (2013) · Pharmaceutical Statistics · doi:10.1002/pst.1589 · Cited by 519
Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparisons: A New Tool for Timely Comparative Effectiveness Research
Signorovitch, J., Sikirica, V., Erder, M. H., Xie, J., Lü, M., Hodgkins, P., Betts, K. A., & Wu, E. Q. (2012) · Value in Health · doi:10.1016/j.jval.2012.05.004 · Cited by 509
Individual patient‐ versus group‐level data meta‐regressions for the investigation of treatment effect modifiers: ecological bias rears its ugly head
Berlin, J. A., Santanna, J., Schmid, C. H., Szczech, L. A. M., & Feldman, H. I. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1023 · Cited by 468
Assessment of publication bias, selection bias, and unavailable data in meta-analyses using individual participant data: a database survey
Ahmed, I., Sutton, A. J., & Riley, R. D. (2012) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.d7762 · Cited by 404
GetReal in network meta-analysis: a review of the methodology
Efthimiou, O., Debray, T. P. A., van Valkenhoef, G., Trelle, S., Panayidou, K., Moons, K. G. M., Reitsma, J. B., Shang, A., Salanti, G., & on behalf of GetReal Methods Review Group (2016) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1195 · Cited by 401
Self-citation
A comparison of summary patient-level covariates in meta-regression with individual patient data meta-analysis
Lambert, P. C., Sutton, A. J., Abrams, K. R., & Jones, D. R. (2002) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(01)00414-0 · Cited by 398
Multilevel modelling of medical data
Goldstein, H., Browne, W. J., & Rasbash, J. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1264 · Cited by 388
Comparative Effectiveness Without Head-to-Head Trials
Signorovitch, J., Wu, E. Q., Yu, A. P., Gerrits, C. M., Kantor, E., Bao, Y., Gupta, S. R., & Mulani, P. M. (2010) · PharmacoEconomics · doi:10.2165/11538370-000000000-00000 · Cited by 387
Indirect Treatment Comparison/Network Meta-Analysis Study Questionnaire to Assess Relevance and Credibility to Inform Health Care Decision Making: An ISPOR-AMCP-NPC Good Practice Task Force Report
Jansen, J. P., Trikalinos, T., Cappelleri, J. C., Daw, J., Andes, S., Eldessouki, R., & Salanti, G. (2014) · Value in Health · doi:10.1016/j.jval.2014.01.004 · Cited by 319
A new approach to modelling interactions between treatment and continuous covariates in clinical trials by using fractional polynomials
Royston, P. J., & Sauerbrei, W. (2004) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1815 · Cited by 281
Meta‐analysis of continuous outcomes combining individual patient data and aggregate data
Riley, R. D., Lambert, P. C., Staessen, J. A., Wang, J., Gueyffier, F., Thijs, L., & Boutitie, F. (2007) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.3165 · Cited by 280
Meta-analyses of Adverse Effects Data Derived from Randomised Controlled Trials as Compared to Observational Studies: Methodological Overview
Golder, S., Loke, Y. K., & Bland, M. (2011) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001026 · Cited by 279
Systematic reviews of trials and other studies.
Sutton, A. J., Abrams, K. R., Jones, D. R., Sheldon, T., & Сонг (1998) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta2190 · Cited by 270
Meta‐analysis of continuous outcome data from individual patients
Higgins, J. P. T., Whitehead, A., Turner, R., Omar, R., & Thompson, S. G. (2001) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.918 · Cited by 266
The strengths and limitations of meta-analyses based on aggregate data
Lyman, G. H., & Kuderer, N. M. (2005) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-5-14 · Cited by 250
Meta-regression detected associations between heterogeneous treatment effects and study-level, but not patient-level, factors
Schmid, C. H., Stark, P. C., Berlin, J. A., Landais, P., & Lau, J. (2004) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2003.12.001 · Cited by 245
Statistical Analysis of Individual Participant Data Meta-Analyses: A Comparison of Methods and Recommendations for Practice
Stewart, G. B., Altman, D. G., Askie, L. M., Duley, L., Simmonds, M. C., & Stewart, L. A. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0046042 · Cited by 238
Investigating patient exclusion bias in meta-analysis
Tierney, J. F. (2004) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/dyh300 · Cited by 221
Multi-level zero-inflated Poisson regression modelling of correlated count data with excess zeros
Lee, A. H., Wang, K., Scott, J. A., Yau, K. K. W., & McLachlan, G. J. (2006) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1191/0962280206sm429oa · Cited by 210
Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis for a Binary Outcome: One-Stage or Two-Stage?
Debray, T. P. A., Moons, K. G. M., Abo-Zaid, G., Koffijberg, H., & Riley, R. D. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0060650 · Cited by 201
Self-citation
Evidence synthesis combining individual patient data and aggregate data: a systematic review identified current practice and possible methods
Riley, R. D., Simmonds, M. C., & Look, M. P. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.09.009 · Cited by 196
Covariate heterogeneity in meta‐analysis: Criteria for deciding between meta‐regression and individual patient data
Simmonds, M. C., & Higgins, J. P. T. (2006) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.2768 · Cited by 194
Imputation of systematically missing predictors in an individual participant data meta-analysis: a generalized approach using MICE
Jolani, S., Debray, T. P. A., Koffijberg, H., van Buuren, S., & Moons, K. G. M. (2015) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.6451 · Cited by 192
Self-citation
Issues relating to study design and risk of bias when including non‐randomized studies in systematic reviews on the effects of interventions
Higgins, J. P., Ramsay, C., Reeves, B. C., Deeks, J. J., Shea, B., Valentine, J. C., Tugwell, P., & Wells, G. (2013) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1056 · Cited by 183 · cited 3×
“First, researchers should critically appraise the risk of bias in available studies prior to cross-design synthesis and carefully decide whether inclusion is appropriate (Berger et al., 2014; Higgins et al., 2013; Reeves et al., 2003; Wells et al., 2013).”
Background
A critical review of methods for the assessment of patient-level interactions in individual participant data meta-analysis of randomized trials, and guidance for practitioners
Fisher, D. J., Copas, A. J., Tierney, J. F., & Parmar, M. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.11.016 · Cited by 180
Zero‐inflated Poisson regression with random effects to evaluate an occupational injury prevention programme
Yau, K. K. W., & Lee, A. H. (2001) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.860 · Cited by 175
Investigating heterogeneity in an individual patient data meta-analysis of time to event outcomes
Smith, C. T., Williamson, P. R., & Marson, A. G. (2005) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.2050 · Cited by 173
Improving ecological inference using individual‐level data
Jackson, C. H., Best, N., & Richardson, S. T. (2005) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.2370 · Cited by 166
Meta‐analysis of individual‐ and aggregate‐level data
Sutton, A. J., Kendrick, D., & Coupland, C. A. C. (2007) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.2916 · Cited by 162
Comparison of Effect Estimates from a Meta-Analysis of Summary Data from Published Studies and from a Meta-Analysis Using Individual Patient Data for Ovarian Cancer Studies
STEINBERG, K. K., Smith, S. J., Stroup, D. F., Olkin, I., Lee, N. C., Williamson, G. D., & Thacker, S. B. (1997) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009051 · Cited by 151
Logistic random effects regression models: a comparison of statistical packages for binary and ordinal outcomes
Li, B., Lingsma, H. F., Steyerberg, E. W., & Lesaffre, E. M. E. H. (2011) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-11-77 · Cited by 142
Checklists of methodological issues for review authors to consider when including non‐randomized studies in systematic reviews
Wells, G. A., Shea, B., Higgins, J. P., Sterne, J., Tugwell, P., & Reeves, B. C. (2013) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1077 · Cited by 141 · cited 1×
“First, researchers should critically appraise the risk of bias in available studies prior to cross-design synthesis and carefully decide whether inclusion is appropriate (Berger et al., 2014; Higgins et al., 2013; Reeves et al., 2003; Wells et al., 2013).”
Background
A Statistical Framework for Ecological and Aggregate Studies
Wakefield, J. C., & Salway, R. (2001) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (Statistics in Society) · doi:10.1111/1467-985x.00191 · Cited by 140
Meta-Analysis Using Multilevel Models with an Application to the Study of Class Size Effects
Goldstein, H., Yang, M., Omar, R., Turner, R., & Thompson, S. G. (2000) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics) · doi:10.1111/1467-9876.00200 · Cited by 137
Meta-analysis of individual patient data versus aggregate data from longitudinal clinical trials
Jones, A. P., Riley, R. D., Williamson, P. R., & Whitehead, A. (2009) · Clinical Trials · doi:10.1177/1740774508100984 · Cited by 137
Individual participant data meta-analyses should not ignore clustering
Abo-Zaid, G., Guo, B., Deeks, J. J., Debray, T. P. A., Steyerberg, E. W., Moons, K. G. M., & Riley, R. D. (2013) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.12.017 · Cited by 135
Self-citation
A Questionnaire to Assess the Relevance and Credibility of Observational Studies to Inform Health Care Decision Making: An ISPOR-AMCP-NPC Good Practice Task Force Report
Berger, M. L., Martin, B. C., Husereau, D., Worley, K., Allen, J. D., Yang, W., Quon, N. C., Mullins, C. D., Kahler, K. H., & Crown, W. H. (2014) · Value in Health · doi:10.1016/j.jval.2013.12.011 · Cited by 135
Issues in methodological research: perspectives from researchers and commissioners
Lilford, R. J., Richardson, A., Stevens, A., Fitzpatrick, R., Edwards, S., Rock, F., & Hutton, J. L. (2001) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta5080 · Cited by 132 · cited 1×
“This effect is known as theoretical saturation (Lilford et al., 2001).”
Background
Issues relating to confounding and meta‐analysis when including non‐randomized studies in systematic reviews on the effects of interventions
Valentine, J. C., & Thompson, S. G. (2013) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1064 · Cited by 130
A General Framework for Random Effects Survival Analysis in the Cox Proportional Hazards Setting
Sargent, D. J. (1998) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533673 · Cited by 129
Systematic Reviews: Obtaining data from randomised controlled trials: how much do we need for reliable and informative meta-analyses?
Clarke, M. J., & Stewart, L. A. (1994) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.309.6960.1007 · Cited by 117
An introduction to methodological issues when including non‐randomised studies in systematic reviews on the effects of interventions
Reeves, B. C., Higgins, J. P. T., Ramsay, C. R., Shea, B., Tugwell, P., & Wells, G. A. (2013) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1068 · Cited by 116
Mixed treatment comparisons using aggregate and individual participant level data
Saramago, P., Sutton, A. J., Cooper, N. J., & Manca, A. (2012) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.5442 · Cited by 116
Systematic review of methods for individual patient data meta- analysis with binary outcomes
Thomas, D., Radji, S., & Benedetti, A. (2014) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-14-79 · Cited by 110
Statistical methods for the time-to-event analysis of individual participant data from multiple epidemiological studies
Thompson, S. G., Kaptoge, S., White, I. R., Wood, A., Perry, P., & Danesh, J. (2010) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/dyq063 · Cited by 110
Meta‐analysis of a binary outcome using individual participant data and aggregate data
Riley, R. D., & Steyerberg, E. W. (2010) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.4 · Cited by 108
Multiple imputation for handling systematically missing confounders in meta‐analysis of individual participant data
Resche‐Rigon, M., White, I. R., Bartlett, J. W., Peters, S. A. E., Thompson, S. G., & on behalf of the PROG‐IMT Study Group (2013) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.5894 · Cited by 106
Self-citation
Combining multiple imputation and meta‐analysis with individual participant data
Burgess, S., White, I. R., Resche‐Rigon, M., & Wood, A. (2013) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.5844 · Cited by 105
Individual patient data meta-analysis of survival data using Poisson regression models
Crowther, M. J., Riley, R. D., Staessen, J. A., Wang, J., Gueyffier, F., & Lambert, P. C. (2012) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-12-34 · Cited by 102
Hierarchical Related Regression for Combining Aggregate and Individual Data in Studies of Socio-Economic Disease Risk Factors
Jackson, C. H., Best, A. N., & Richardson, S. T. (2007) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (Statistics in Society) · doi:10.1111/j.1467-985x.2007.00500.x · Cited by 101
Meta‐analysis of randomised trials with a continuous outcome according to baseline imbalance and availability of individual participant data
Riley, R. D., Kauser, I., Bland, M., Thijs, L., Staessen, J. A., Wang, J., Gueyffier, F., & Deeks, J. J. (2013) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.5726 · Cited by 100
Multilevel models for meta-analysis, and their application to absolute risk differences
Thompson, S. G., Turner, R., & Warn, D. E. (2001) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/096228020101000602 · Cited by 99
Evidence synthesis as the key to more coherent and efficient research
Sutton, A. J., Cooper, N. J., & Jones, D. R. (2009) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-9-29 · Cited by 95
Combining individual patient data and aggregate data in mixed treatment comparison meta‐analysis: Individual patient data may be beneficial if only for a subset of trials
Donegan, S., Williamson, P. R., D’Alessandro, U., Garner, P., & Smith, C. T. (2012) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.5584 · Cited by 95
Network meta‐analysis of individual and aggregate level data
Jansen, J. P. (2012) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1048 · Cited by 94
Meta‐analysis of ordinal outcomes using individual patient data
Whitehead, A., Omar, R., Higgins, J. P. T., Savaluny, E., Turner, R., & Thompson, S. G. (2001) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.919 · Cited by 93
Generalized linear models with clustered data: Fixed and random effects models
Broström, G., & Holmberg, H. (2011) · Computational Statistics & Data Analysis · doi:10.1016/j.csda.2011.06.011 · Cited by 93
Systematic reviews of trials and other studies.
Sutton, A. J., Abrams, K. R., Jones, D. R. H., Sheldon, T., & Song, F. (1998) · PubMed · Cited by 79
The Use of Two‐Way Linear Mixed Models in Multitreatment Meta‐Analysis
Piepho, H., Williams, E. R., & Madden, L. V. (2012) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.1541-0420.2012.01786.x · Cited by 76
Cross-design Synthesis:A New Form of Meta-analysis for Combining Results from Randomized Clinical Trials and Medical-practice Databases
Droitcour, J. A., Silberman, G., & Chelimsky, E. (1993) · International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care · doi:10.1017/s0266462300004694 · Cited by 76
Random covariances and mixed-effects models for imputing multivariate multilevel continuous data
Yucel, R. M. (2011) · Statistical Modelling · doi:10.1177/1471082x1001100404 · Cited by 72
Multiple imputation inference for multivariate multilevel continuous data with ignorable non-response
Yucel, R. M. (2008) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences · doi:10.1098/rsta.2008.0038 · Cited by 70
Random Effects Models for Combining Results from Controlled and Uncontrolled Studies in a Meta-Analysis
Li, Z., & Begg, C. (1994) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1994.10476892 · Cited by 65
Individual patient data meta‐analysis of time‐to‐event outcomes: one‐stage versus two‐stage approaches for estimating the hazard ratio under a random effects model
Bowden, J., Tierney, J. F., Simmonds, M. C., Copas, A. J., & Higgins, J. P. T. (2011) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.45 · Cited by 62
Thinking big: large-scale collaborative research in observational epidemiology
Thompson, A. (2009) · European Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1007/s10654-009-9412-1 · Cited by 58
Comparative calibration without a gold standard
Lü, Y., Keying Ye, B., Mathur, A. K., Hui, S. L., Fuerst, T. P., & Genant, H. K. (1997) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19970830)16:16 · Cited by 56
Comparison of One‐Step and Two‐Step Meta‐Analysis Models Using Individual Patient Data
Mathew, T., & Nordström, K. (2010) · Biometrical Journal · doi:10.1002/bimj.200900143 · Cited by 55
A comparison of methods for fixed effects meta-analysis of individual patient data with time to event outcomes
Smith, C. T., & Williamson, P. R. (2007) · Clinical Trials · doi:10.1177/1740774507085276 · Cited by 53
An overview of methods and empirical comparison of aggregate data and individual patient data results for investigating heterogeneity in meta‐analysis of time‐to‐event outcomes
Smith, C. T., Williamson, P. R., & Marson, A. G. (2005) · Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2005.00559.x · Cited by 51
Assessing the consistency assumption by exploring treatment by covariate interactions in mixed treatment comparison meta‐analysis: individual patient‐level covariates versus aggregate trial‐level covariates
Donegan, S., Williamson, P. R., D’Alessandro, U., & Smith, C. T. (2012) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.5470 · Cited by 50
Allowing for uncertainty due to missing data in meta‐analysis—Part 2: Hierarchical models
White, I. R., Welton, N. J., Wood, A., Ades, A. E., & Higgins, J. P. T. (2007) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.3007 · Cited by 49
Empirical comparison of subgroup effects in conventional and individual patient data meta-analyses
Koopman, L., van der Heijden, G. J. M. G., Hoes, A. W., Grobbee, D. E., & Rovers, M. M. (2008) · International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care · doi:10.1017/s0266462308080471 · Cited by 48
Predictive modeling and heterogeneity of baseline risk in meta-analysis of individual patient data
Trikalinos, T. A., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2001) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(00)00311-5 · Cited by 47
Investigating trial and treatment heterogeneity in an individual patient data meta‐analysis of survival data by means of the penalized maximum likelihood approach
Rondeau, V., Michiels, S., Liquet, B., & Pignon, J. (2007) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.3161 · Cited by 47
Individual Patient- versus Literature-Based Meta-analysis of Survival Data
Duchateau, L., Pignon, J., Bijnens, L., Bertin, S., Bourhis, J., & Sylvester, R. J. (2001) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/s0197-2456(01)00152-0 · Cited by 44
Comparison of Methods of Handling Missing Data in Individual Patient Data Meta-analyses: An Empirical Example on Antibiotics in Children with Acute Otitis Media
Koopman, L., van der Heijden, G. J. M. G., Grobbee, D. E., & Rovers, M. M. (2007) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwm341 · Cited by 41
Individual Patient-level and Study-level Meta-analysis for Investigating Modifiers of Treatment Effect
Teramukai, S. (2004) · Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1093/jjco/hyh138 · Cited by 40
Estimating treatment effect via simple cross design synthesis
Kaizar, E. E. (2011) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4339 · Cited by 39
Random effects survival models gave a better understanding of heterogeneity in individual patient data meta-analyses
Michiels, S., BAUJAT, B., Mahé, C., Sargent, D. J., & Pignon, J. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.08.013 · Cited by 37
Proportional hazards models with random effects to examine centre effects in multicentre cancer clinical trials
Yamaguchi, T., Ohashi, Y., & Matsuyama, Y. (2002) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1191/0962280202sm284ra · Cited by 35
Individual patient meta-analysis—rewards and challenges
van Walraven, C. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.04.001 · Cited by 32
A systematic review of analytical methods used to study subgroups in (individual patient data) meta-analyses
Koopman, L., van der Heijden, G. J. M. G., Glasziou, P., Grobbee, D. E., & Rovers, M. M. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.01.018 · Cited by 31
Review on evidence-based cancer medicine
Clarke, M. J., & Godwin, J. (1998) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1023/a:1008468705492 · Cited by 30
Practical methodology of meta-analysis of individual patient data using a survival outcome
Katsahian, S., Latouche, A., Mary, J., Chevret, S., & Porcher, R. (2007) · Contemporary Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/j.cct.2007.08.002 · Cited by 29
Bayesian Methods for the Cross-Design Synthesis of Epidemiological and Toxicological Evidence
Peters, J., Rushton, L., Sutton, A. J., Jones, D. R., Abrams, K. R., & Mugglestone, M. A. (2004) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics) · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9876.2005.00476.x · Cited by 28
A Bayesian hierarchical model for multi-level repeated ordinal data: analysis of oral practice examinations in a large anaesthesiology training programme
Tan, M. T., Qu, Y., Mascha, E. J., & Schubert, A. (1999) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19990815)18:15 · Cited by 26
One‐stage parametric meta‐analysis of time‐to‐event outcomes
Siannis, F., Barrett, J., Farewell, V. T., & Tierney, J. F. (2010) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4086 · Cited by 24
Exploring the Relationship Between Surrogates and Clinical Outcomes: Analysis of Individual Patient Data vs. Meta-regression on Group-Level Summary Statistics
Li, Z., & Meredith, M. P. (2003) · Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics · doi:10.1081/bip-120024209 · Cited by 23
Differences in interaction and subgroup-specific effects were observed between randomized and nonrandomized studies in three empirical examples
Schmidt, A. F., Rovers, M. M., Klungel, O. H., Hoes, A. W., Knol, M. J., Nielen, M., de Boer, A., & Groenwold, R. H. H. (2013) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.08.008 · Cited by 22
Self-citation
Use of Bayesian Multivariate Meta-Analysis to Estimate the HAQ for Mapping Onto the EQ-5D Questionnaire in Rheumatoid Arthritis
Bujkiewicz, S., Thompson, J. R., Sutton, A. J., Cooper, N. J., Harrison, M. J., Symmons, D. P. M., & Abrams, K. R. (2014) · Value in Health · doi:10.1016/j.jval.2013.11.005 · Cited by 19
Two‐stage meta‐analysis of survival data from individual participants using percentile ratios
Barrett, J., Farewell, V. T., Siannis, F., Tierney, J. F., & Higgins, J. P. T. (2012) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.5516 · Cited by 19
The devil is in the details...or not? A primer on individual patient data meta-analysis
Sud, S., & Douketis, J. D. (2009) · BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine · doi:10.1136/ebm.14.4.100 · Cited by 17
Inconsistent results in meta-analyses for the prevention of falls are found between study-level data and patient-level data
Haines, T. P., & Hill, A. (2010) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.024 · Cited by 16
A linearization approach for the model‐based analysis of combined aggregate and individual patient data
Ravva, P., Karlsson, M. O., & French, J. L. (2014) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.6045 · Cited by 13
A comparison of the results of checked versus unchecked individual patient data meta-analyses.
Burdett, S., & Stewart, L. A. (2002) · PubMed · Cited by 10
Understanding differences in results from literature-based and individual patient meta-analyses: An example from meta-analyses of observational data
Poppe, K., Doughty, R. N., Yu, C., Quintana, M., Møller, J. E., Klein, A. L., Gamble, G. D., Dini, F. L., & WHALLEY, G. A. (2009) · International Journal of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2009.09.566 · Cited by 10
Bayesian inference for multivariate meta‐analysis Box–Cox transformation models for individual patient data with applications to evaluation of cholesterol‐lowering drugs
Kim, S., Chen, M., Ibrahim, J. G., Shah, A. K., & Lin, J. (2013) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.5814 · Cited by 10
Random Effects Models for Combining Results from Controlled and Uncontrolled Studies in a Meta-Analysis
Li, Z., & Begg, C. B. (1994) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2291015 · Cited by 10
Meta-Analysis Of Results And Individual Patient Data In Epidemiologal Studies
Tobı́as, A., Sáez, M., & Kogevinas, M. (2004) · Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods · doi:10.22237/jmasm/1083370680 · Cited by 8
The use of individual patient-level data (IPD) to quantify the impact of pretreatment predictors of response to treatment in chronic hepatitis B patients
Ali, S., Mealing, S., Hawkins, N., Lescrauwaet, B., Björk, S., Mantovani, L. G., & Lampertico, P. (2013) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001309 · Cited by 3
Assessing the potential for bias in meta-analysis due to selective reporting of subgroup analyses within studies
Hahn, S., Williamson, P. R., Hutton, J. L., Garner, P., & Flynn, E. V. (2000) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/1097-0258(20001230)19:24

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 121 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

Efthimiou O, 2015, Methods for network meta‐analysis: a review, Research Synthesis Methods
10.1002/1097-0258(20001230)19:24<3417::AID-SIM614>3.0.CO;2-L · DOI · Paper page
10.1002/1097-0258(20001230)19:24<3309::AID-SIM825>3.0.CO;2-9 · DOI · Paper page

Sorted by citations

Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math
Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Arroyo, E. N., Behling, S., Chambwe, N., Cintrón, D. L., Cooper, J. D., Dunster, G., et al. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1916903117 · Cited by 1,387
Meta-analysis using individual participant data: One-stage and two-stage approaches, and why they may differ
Burke, D. L., Ensor, J., & Riley, R. D. (2017) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.7141 · Cited by 538
Risk of acute myocardial infarction with NSAIDs in real world use: bayesian meta-analysis of individual patient data
Bally, M., Dendukuri, N., Rich, B., Nadeau, L., Helin‐Salmivaara, A., Garbe, E., & Brophy, J. M. (2017) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.j1909 · Cited by 561
GetReal in network meta-analysis: a review of the methodology
Efthimiou, O., Debray, T. P. A., van Valkenhoef, G., Trelle, S., Panayidou, K., Moons, K. G. M., Reitsma, J. B., Shang, A., Salanti, G., & on behalf of GetReal Methods Review Group (2016) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1195 · Cited by 401
Self-citation
A framework for meta-analysis of prediction model studies with binary and time-to-event outcomes
Debray, T. P., Damen, J. A., Riley, R. D., Snell, K., Reitsma, J. B., Hooft, L., Collins, G. S., & Moons, K. G. (2019) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/0962280218785504 · Cited by 278
Self-citation

See all 348

Authors: Debray, T. P. A., Moons, K. G. M., van Valkenhoef, G., Efthimiou, O., Hummel, N., Groenwold, R. H. H., Reitsma, J. B., & on behalf of the GetReal methods review group
Affiliations: University of Groningen (NL)
Department of Epidemiology University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen Groningen The Netherlands
University of Ioannina (GR)
University of Bern (CH)
University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
Corresponding author: Debray, Thomas P. A.
ORCID: Debray, Thomas P. A.
Moons, Karel G. M.
Efthimiou, Orestis
Hummel, Noemi
Groenwold, Rolf H. H.
Reitsma, Johannes B.
Venue: Research Synthesis Methods
Publisher: Wiley
Published: 2015-08-19
Volume: 6
Issue: 4
Pages: 293-309
ISSN: 1759-2879 (ISSN-L)
1759-2887
DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1160
PMC: PMC5042043
OpenAlex: W1841651683
Cited by: 348
References: 121
Citations by year: 2026: 28 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 2
FWCI: 3.53
Type: journal article
Language: en
Open access: hybrid
doi.org
Licence: cc-by-nc-nd
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (vor)
Locations: Research Synthesis Methods (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
PubMed (publishedVersion)
Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
BORIS (University Library Bern) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Funders: Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Undertaking (115546)
European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/20072013)
Topics: Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
Keywords: individual patient data meta-analysis, treatment effect estimation, clinical trials, non-randomized studies, methodological assumptions
MeSH terms: Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Software, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Models, Statistical, Linear Models, Proportional Hazards Models, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Get real in individual participant data (IPD) meta‐analysis: a review of the methodology

Abstract

Overview

Integrity signals

Verification

Claims the paper makes

Claims other papers make about this one

Self-check

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Related

Metadata

Record

About these checks