Subgroup analyses may be misleading - Students 4 Best Evidence

Findings based on results for subgroups of people within a treatment comparison may be misleading. These analyses are often poorly planned and reported.

Subgroup analyses may be misleading

Relapse in clinically stable adult patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder: evidence-based criteria derived by equipercentile linking and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis - The Lancet Psychiatry

Massive hemorrhage: a very deep dive - First10EM

Prospect Theory: What It Is and How It Works, With Examples

Interpreting the results of noninferiority trials—a review

The difference between a systematic review and a meta-analysis - Covidence

Heterogeneity: what is it and why does it matter? - Students 4 Best Evidence

Over‐optimism in benchmark studies and the multiplicity of design and analysis options when interpreting their results - Nießl - 2022 - WIREs Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery - Wiley Online Library

Bad Pharma: How Drug Companies Mislead by Goldacre, Ben

Subgroup analyses may be misleading - Students 4 Best Evidence

Is a subgroup effect believable? Updating criteria to evaluate the credibility of subgroup analyses

Meta-analysis course: part 5: Subgroup analysis & Meta-regression

Efficacy and Safety of the mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine

Is a subgroup effect believable? Updating criteria to evaluate the credibility of subgroup analyses

No knowledge gap in human physiology after remote teaching for second year medical students throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, BMC Medical Education