Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 28, 2025

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments
Published on: March 1, 2022
Geometric approaches to assessing the numerical feasibility for conducting matching-adjusted indirect comparisons
Ekkehard Glimm1,2, Lillian Yau1
1Novartis Pharma AG, Clinical Development and Analytics, Basel, Switzerland.
Abstract:
We discuss how to handle matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) from a data analyst's perspective. We introduce several multivariate data analysis methods to assess the appropriateness of MAIC for a given set of baseline characteristics. These methods focus on comparing the baseline variables used in the matching of a study that provides the summary statistics or aggregated data (AD) and a study that provides individual patient level data (IPD). The methods identify situations when no numerical solutions are possible with the MAIC method. This helps to avoid misleading results being produced. Moreover, it has been observed that sometimes contradicting results are reported by two sets of MAIC analyses produced by two teams, each having their own IPD and applying MAIC using the AD published by the other team. We show that an intrinsic property of the MAIC estimated weights can be a contributing factor for this phenomenon.
Related Concept Videos
Multiple Comparison Tests
It would be easy to compare two samples using a significance alpha level of 0.05. In other words, there is only one sample pair to be compared. However, it would be difficult to identify a significantly different sample if the number...
Sign Test for Matched Pairs
To conduct the sign test, we first calculate the differences in...
Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks Test for Matched Pairs
Bonferroni Test
The means of different samples are first paired in all possible combinations.
The null hypothesis of the...
Estimation of the Physical Quantities
Friedman Two-way Analysis of Variance by Ranks

