Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26461078›Full record

ArticlePLoS medicine2015

Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analyses of diagnostic and prognostic modeling studies: guidance on their use.

Thomas P A Debray, Richard D Riley, Maroeska M Rovers, Johannes B Reitsma, Karel G M Moons, Cochrane IPD Meta-analysis Methods group

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers, 22 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed, 22 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

74 citing papers in PubMed, 22 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

14 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Thomas P A DebrayJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands; The Dutch Cochrane Centre, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Richard D RileyResearch Institute for Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire, The United Kingdom.
Maroeska M RoversRadboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboudumc Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Johannes B ReitsmaJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands; The Dutch Cochrane Centre, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Karel G M MoonsJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands; The Dutch Cochrane Centre, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Cochrane IPD Meta-analysis Methods group

Funding

Medical Research Council G0902393Medical Research Council MR/L004933/1Medical Research Council MR/L004933/1- R20
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchDecision Support TechniquesDiagnosisMeta-Analysis as TopicHumansModels, StatisticalPrognosisResearch DesignRisk AssessmentValidation Studies as Topic

Identifiers

PMID26461078
PMCPMC4603958

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.