ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2025
Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis: An introduction - Narrative review.
Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness and Safety of Contemporary Drug Regimens for Multidrug- and Extensively Drug-resistant Tuberculosis in Children and Adolescents: A Global Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.The Pediatric infectious disease journal · 2026Pooled it
- The relationship between depression and cognitive function among adults with spinal cord injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Spinal cord · 2026Pooled it
- Submission of manuscript to IJA - Need to know more!Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses (MA) are accepted modalities for evidence synthesis in evidence-based medicine. However, as MA uses aggregate data that includes averaging patient characteristics and pooled effect estimates, it has limitations when considering personalised medicine. In contrast, individual participant data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) includes and segregates individual patient data to study new outcomes, identify outcome predictors, and analyse multiple covariate effects on treatments. IPD-MA requires data from multiple investigators, review board approvals, clear communication with collaborators, and statistical recalculation of cumulative data. IPD-MA can be performed as a single-stage process where data from all included studies is pooled and reanalysed or as a two-stage process where additionally the data from individual studies is re-analysed before being pooled. This review aims to orient clinicians about IPD-MA, including the process of performing it, comparing it with other types of meta-analyses and considering the potential barriers in conducting it.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.