Consistency between direct trial evidence and Bayesian Mixed Treatment Comparison: Is head-to-head evidence always more reliable?

This is the latest version of this eprint.

Madan, J., Cooper, K.L., Stevenson, M.D. et al. (2 more authors) (2009) Consistency between direct trial evidence and Bayesian Mixed Treatment Comparison: Is head-to-head evidence always more reliable? Discussion Paper. HEDS Discussion Paper 09/08 .

Abstract

Metadata

Authors/Creators:
  • Madan, J. (jason.madan@bristol.ac.uk)
  • Cooper, K.L. (k.l.cooper@sheffield.ac.uk)
  • Stevenson, M.D. (m.d.stevenson@sheffield.ac.uk)
  • Whyte, S. (sophie.whyte@sheffield.ac.uk)
  • Akehurst, R. (r.l.akehurst@sheffield.ac.uk)
Keywords: Bayesian methods, granulocyte colony-stimulating factors, G-CSFs, febrile neutropenia, mixed treatment comparison, methodology
Dates:
  • 2009
Institution: The University of Sheffield
Academic Units: The University of Sheffield > Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health (Sheffield) > School of Health and Related Research (Sheffield) > Health Economics and Decision Science > HEDS Discussion Paper Series
Depositing User: ScHARR / HEDS (Sheffield)
Date Deposited: 31 Oct 2012 09:46
Last Modified: 09 Jun 2014 08:42
Status: Published
Series Name: HEDS Discussion Paper 09/08

Available Versions of this Item

Download

Filename: 09.08.pdf

Share / Export