Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 559

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Interpretation of subgroup analyses in systematic reviews: A tutorial

Open access
Richardson, Marty, Garner, Paul, Donegan, Sarah·2019·Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health
DOI 10.1016/j.cegh.2018.05.005
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Authors of systematic reviews may perform subgroup analyses to investigate how treatment effect varies across different subgroups of patients or trials. Previous research has shown that Cochrane review authors do not sufficiently report their interpretation of subgroup analyses. Consequently, we developed a tutorial with the aim of improving the interpretation of subgroup analyses in reviews. We explain the importance of interpreting subgroup analyses, and demonstrate how to interpret subgroup analyses using theoretical examples and a real-life subgroup analysis with clinical context. Finally, we provide recommendations for the interpretation of subgroup analyses in systematic reviews.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cegh.2018.05.005

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Richardson, M., Garner, P., & Donegan, S.
Venue
Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-06
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
192-198
ISSN
2213-3984 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.cegh.2018.05.005
OpenAlex
W2803410130
Cited by
559
References
0
FWCI
6.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

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.