论文检索

网络元分析的因果视角AI 解读

Pairwise and network meta-analyses occupy the highest tier of evidence-based medicine and routinely inform clinical guidelines and healthcare decision-making. Current approaches typically aggregate study-level treatment effects to obtain an overall estimate. We argue that the causal estimand should come first, with the aggregation derived only afterwards: the target population and the relevant sources of between-study heterogeneity should be explicitly defined before…

因果元分析：重新审视循证医学的基础AI 解读

Meta-analysis, by synthesizing effect estimates from multiple studies conducted in diverse settings, stands at the top of the evidence hierarchy in clinical research. Yet, conventional approaches based on fixed- or random-effects models lack a causal framework, which may limit their interpretability and utility for public policy. Incorporating causal inference reframes meta-analysis as the estimation of well-defined causal effects on clearly specified populations, enabling a…

量化处理效应：因果推断中的风险比估计AI 解读

Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) are the current gold standards to empirically measure the effect of a new drug. However, they may be of limited size and resorting to complementary non-randomized data, referred to as observational, is promising, as additional sources of evidence. In both RCT and observational data, the Risk Difference (RD) is often used to characterize the effect of a drug. Additionally, medical guidelines recommend to also report the Risk Ratio (RR),…

总体层面因果效应度量可迁移性的统一框架AI 解读

Generalization methods offer a powerful solution to one of the key drawbacks of randomized controlled trials (RCTs): their limited representativeness. By enabling the transport of treatment effect estimates to target populations subject to distributional shifts, these methods are increasingly recognized as the future of meta-analysis, the current gold standard in evidence-based medicine. Yet most existing approaches focus on the risk difference, overlooking the diverse range…