Jonathan J Deeks

Dados Biográficos

ID7782260
NOMEJonathan J Deeks
PRENOMESJonathan J
SOBRENOMEDeeks
ASSINATURADEEKS J J
AFILIAÇÕESUniversity of Birmingham
ORCID0000-0002-8850-1971
VERIFICADOSim
TOTAL DE OBRAS8
TOTAL DE CITAÇÕES0
TOTAL COMO AUTOR8
TOTAL COMO EDITOR0
PRIMEIRO ANO DE PUBLICAÇÃO2003
ANO MAIS RECENTE DE PUBLICAÇÃO2019
ÍNDICE H0

  • Analysing data and undertaking meta‐analyses

    Open AccessJonathan J Deeks, Julian P T Higgins et al.OTHERCochrane Handbook for Systematic…2019

    This chapter describes the principles and methods used to carry out a meta-analysis for a comparison of two interventions for the main types of data encountered. A very common and simple version of the meta-analysis procedure is commonly referred to as the inverse-variance method. This approach is implemented in its most basic form in RevMan, and is used behind the scenes in many meta-analyses of both dichotomous and continuous data. Results may …

  • Robins-I

    Open AccessJonathan Sterne, Jonathan AC Sterne et al.ARTICLEBMJ2016

    Non-randomised studies of the effects of interventions are critical to many areas of healthcare evaluation, but their results may be biased. It is therefore important to understand and appraise their strengths and weaknesses. We developed ROBINS-I (“Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions”), a new tool for evaluating risk of bias in estimates of the comparative effectiveness (harm or benefit) of interventions from studies that d…

  • A cluster-randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a childhood obesity prevention programme delivered through schools, targeting 6–7 year old children

    Open AccessP Adab, Miranda Pallan et al.ARTICLEBMC Public Health2015

    Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN97000586 (registered May 2010)

  • Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials

    Open AccessJonathan Sterne, J A C Sterne et al.ARTICLEBMJ2011

    Funnel plots, and tests for funnel plot asymmetry, have been widely used to examine bias in the results of meta-analyses. Funnel plot asymmetry should not be equated with publication bias, because it has a number of other possible causes. This article describes how to interpret funnel plot asymmetry, recommends appropriate tests, and explains the implications for choice of meta-analysis model

  • Quadas-2

    Open AccessPenny Whiting, Penny F Whiting et al.ARTICLEAnnals of Internal Medicine2011

    In 2003, the QUADAS tool for systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy studies was developed. Experience, anecdotal reports, and feedback suggested areas for improvement; therefore, QUADAS-2 was developed. This tool comprises 4 domains: patient selection, index test, reference standard, and flow and timing. Each domain is assessed in terms of risk of bias, and the first 3 domains are also assessed in terms of concerns regarding applicability. Sig…

  • Interpretation of random effects meta-analyses

    Open AccessRichard D Riley, Julian P T Higgins et al.ARTICLEBMJ2011

    estimates of treatment effect from random effects meta-analysis give only the average effect across all studies. Inclusion of prediction intervals, which estimate the likely effect in an individual setting, could make it easier to apply the results to clinical practice

  • Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies

    Open AccessJonathan J Deeks, J Deeks et al.ARTICLEHealth Technology Assessment2003

    OBJECTIVES: To consider methods and related evidence for evaluating bias in non-randomised intervention studies. DATA SOURCES: Systematic reviews and methodological papers were identified from a search of electronic databases; handsearches of key medical journals and contact with experts working in the field. New empirical studies were conducted using data from two large randomised clinical trials. METHODS: Three systematic reviews and new empiri…

  • Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses

    Open AccessJulian P T Higgins, Simon G Thompson et al.ARTICLEBMJ2003

    Cochrane Reviews have recently started including the quantity I2 to help readers assess the consistency of the results of studies in meta-analyses. What does this new quantity mean, and why is assessment of heterogeneity so important to clinical practice?