Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30508309›Full record

ArticleResearch synthesis methods2019

The use of mathematical modeling studies for evidence synthesis and guideline development: A glossary.

Teegwendé V Porgo, Susan L Norris, Georgia Salanti, Leigh F Johnson, Julie A Simpson, Nicola Low, Matthias Egger, Christian L Althaus

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research synthesis methods, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Explaining "U-shaped" distributions of population substance use with a simple computational approach.Journal of artificial societies and social simulation : JASSS · 2025
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Teegwendé V PorgoPopulation Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Unit, Department of Social and Preventative Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0298-0711
Susan L NorrisDepartment of Information, Evidence and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0042-2452
Georgia SalantiInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3830-8508
Leigh F JohnsonCentre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Research, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Julie A SimpsonCentre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2660-2013
Nicola LowInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4817-8986
Matthias EggerInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7462-5132
Christian L AlthausInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5230-6760

Funding

JA Simpson is funded by a NHMRC Senior Research Fellowship 1104975JA Simpson's research is supported by two NHMRC Centres of Research Excellence (Victoria Centre for Biostatistics, ViCBiostat; and Policy relevant infectious disease simulation and mathematical modelling, PRISM).Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR)World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mathematical modeling studies are increasingly recognised as an important tool for evidence synthesis and to inform clinical and public health decision-making, particularly when data from systematic reviews of primary studies do not adequately answer a research question. However, systematic reviewers and guideline developers may struggle with using the results of modeling studies, because, at least in part, of the lack of a common understanding of concepts and terminology between evidence synthesis experts and mathematical modellers. The use of a common terminology for modeling studies across different clinical and epidemiological research fields that span infectious and non-communicable diseases will help systematic reviewers and guideline developers with the understanding, characterisation, comparison, and use of mathematical modeling studies. This glossary explains key terms used in mathematical modeling studies that are particularly salient to evidence synthesis and knowledge translation in clinical medicine and public health.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based MedicineGuidelines as TopicModels, TheoreticalAlgorithmsCalibrationComputer SimulationDecision MakingExtensively Drug-Resistant TuberculosisHumansMarkov ChainsModels, StatisticalMonte Carlo MethodPublic HealthResearch DesignStochastic ProcessesTranslational Research, Biomedicalevidence synthesisglossaryguidelinesknowledge translationmathematical modeling studies

Identifiers

PMID30508309
PMCPMC6491984

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.