The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Practical methodology of meta‐analyses (overviews) using updated individual patient data
Abstract
Meta‐analyses using updated individual patient data may provide the most reliable means of combining data from similar randomized controlled trials. The benefits of this approach to systematic reviews are described. Guidance, based on the experience of several groups who have undertaken such projects, is given. This includes practical advice on initiating and maintaining collaboration, the time and resources required to undertake these usually international projects and methods of data checking and validation. Example proforma are included.
Overview
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
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Publication bias in clinical research
Easterbrook, P. J., Gopalan, R., Berlin, J. A., & Matthews, D. R. (1991) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/0140-6736(91)90201-y · Cited by 3,109
CHALMERS, I. (1993) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1993.tb26345.x · Cited by 561
Full Publication of Results Initially Presented in Abstracts: A Meta-analysis
Scherer, R. W. (1994) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1994.03520020084025 · Cited by 296
Should Unpublished Data Be Included in Meta-analyses?: Current Convictions and Controversies
Cook, D. J. (1993) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1993.03500210049030 · Cited by 259
Multiple publication of reports of drug trials.
G�tzsche, P. C. (1989) · European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology · doi:10.1007/bf00558064 · Cited by 113
Research works printed but not linked: 17
- 10.1016/0140-6736(93)93004-K · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/0140-6736(93)91258-N · DOI
- 10.1200/JCO.1994.12.4.877 · DOI
- 10.1136/bmj.309.6964.1286 · DOI
- Dickersin K., 1992, Factors influencing publication of research results, Journal of the American Medical Association, 267, 374, 10.1001/jama.1992.03480030052036 · DOI · Paper page
- Dickersin K. andMin Y. I.‘NIH clinical trials and publication bias’ Online Journal of Current Clinical Trials (serial online) Doc No 50 (1993).
- 10.1016/0197-2456(92)90022-R · DOI
- 10.1002/sim.4780110307 · DOI
- 10.1136/bmj.309.6960.1007 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1136/bmj.303.6807.884 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/0140-6736(92)90997-H · DOI
- Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group, 1990, Treatment of Early Breast Cancer: Vol. 1, Worldwide Evidence 1990
- 10.1016/0197-2456(93)90109-Q · DOI
- Rochon P. A., 1994, Evaluating the quality of articles published in journal supplements compared with the quality of those published in the parent journal, Journal of the American Medical Association, 272, 108, 10.1001/jama.1994.03520020034009 · DOI
- 10.1136/bmj.295.6599.654 · DOI
- Antman E. M., 1992, A comparison of results of meta‐analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts, Journal of the American Medical Association, 268, 240, 10.1001/jama.1992.03490020088036 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/S0140-6736(94)92407-4 · DOI
Cited by
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 · Cited by 64,042
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.
(2009) · PubMed Central · Cited by 44,859
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & the PRISMA Group* (2009) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135 · Cited by 37,554
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100 · Cited by 28,164
Metadata
- Authors
- Stewart, L. A., & Cochrane Working Group On Meta‐Analysis Using Individual Patient Data
- Venue
- Statistics in Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1995-10-15
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 19
- Pages
- 2057-2079
- ISSN
- 0277-6715 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0258
- OpenAlex
- W2158379591
- Cited by
- 492
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 17.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Practical methodology of meta‐analyses (overviews) using updated individual patient data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/sim.4780141902
- The paper
- Stewart, L. A., & Cochrane Working Group On Meta‐Analysis Using Individual Patient Data. (1995). Practical methodology of meta‐analyses (overviews) using updated individual patient data. Statistics in Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4780141902
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
