Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks Test for Matched Pairs01:09

Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks Test for Matched Pairs

208
The Wilcoxon signed-rank test for matched pairs evaluates the null hypothesis by combining the ranks of differences with their signs. It essentially tests whether the median of the differences in a population of matched pairs is zero. Since the test incorporates more information than the sign test, it generally yields more trustable conclusions. This test also does not require the data to follow a normal distribution, but two conditions must be met for it to be applicable: (1) the data must...
208
Multiple Comparison Tests01:13

Multiple Comparison Tests

4.0K
Multiple comparison test, abbreviated as MCT, is a post hoc analysis generally performed after comparing multiple samples with one or more tests. An MCT will help identify a significantly different sample among multiple samples or a factor among multiple factors.
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...
4.0K
Sign Test for Matched Pairs01:17

Sign Test for Matched Pairs

202
The sign test for matched pairs offers a robust method for comparing two paired samples, often for the effects of an intervention in one of them. This method is very useful in situations where the underlying distribution of the data is unknown. The test compares two related samples—often pre- and post-treatment measurements on the same subjects—to determine if there are significant differences in their median values.
To conduct the sign test, we first calculate the differences in...
202
Bonferroni Test01:10

Bonferroni Test

2.8K
The Bonferroni test is a statistical test named after Carlo Emilio Bonferroni, an Italian mathematician best known for Bonferroni inequalities. This statistical test is a type of multiple comparison test to determine which means are different than the rest. Bonferroni test can minimize the Type 1 error by reducing the significance level alpha, which otherwise increases with sample pairs.
The means of different samples are first paired in all possible combinations.
The null hypothesis of the...
2.8K
Friedman Two-way Analysis of Variance by Ranks01:21

Friedman Two-way Analysis of Variance by Ranks

287
Friedman's Two-Way Analysis of Variance by Ranks is a nonparametric test designed to identify differences across multiple test attempts when traditional assumptions of normality and equal variances do not apply. Unlike conventional ANOVA, which requires normally distributed data with equal variances, Friedman's test is ideal for ordinal or non-normally distributed data, making it particularly useful for analyzing dependent samples, such as matched subjects over time or repeated measures...
287
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups01:20

Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups

269
Survival analysis is a cornerstone of medical research, used to evaluate the time until an event of interest occurs, such as death, disease recurrence, or recovery. Unlike standard statistical methods, survival analysis is particularly adept at handling censored data—instances where the event has not occurred for some participants by the end of the study or remains unobserved. To address these unique challenges, specialized techniques like the Kaplan-Meier estimator, log-rank test, and...
269

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Estimands and their implications for evidence synthesis for oncology: A simulation study of treatment switching in meta-analysis.

Research synthesis methods·2026
Same author

Effect modification and non-collapsibility together may lead to conflicting treatment decisions: A review of marginal and conditional estimands and recommendations for decision-making.

Research synthesis methods·2026
Same author

Transportability of model-based estimands in evidence synthesis.

Statistics in medicine·2024
Same author

Broad versus narrow research questions in evidence synthesis: A parallel to (and plea for) estimands.

Research synthesis methods·2024
Same author

Model-based standardization using multiple imputation.

BMC medical research methodology·2024
Same author

Target estimands for population-adjusted indirect comparisons.

Statistics in medicine·2022
Same journal

Methods for incorporating test result information within the high-dimensional propensity score framework: application in UK electronic health record data.

BMC medical research methodology·2026
Same journal

Sparse multi-way DMDC for longitudinal classification in high dimension low sample size data.

BMC medical research methodology·2026
Same journal

Tree-based exploratory identification of predictive biomarkers in non-randomized data.

BMC medical research methodology·2026
Same journal

Comparative evaluation of interrupted time series analytical methods for healthcare quality improvement research: a Monte Carlo simulation study.

BMC medical research methodology·2026
Same journal

Methodological advances in claims-based dementia algorithms: integrating medication and clinical data for medicare populations.

BMC medical research methodology·2026
Same journal

An interpretable XGboost algorithm for predicting 30-day mortality in acute pancreatitis using routine biomarkers.

BMC medical research methodology·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Sep 2, 2025

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups
14:14

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups

Published on: May 13, 2022

6.0K

Two-stage matching-adjusted indirect comparison.

Antonio Remiro-Azócar1,2

  • 1Medical Affairs Statistics, Bayer plc, 400 South Oak Way, Reading, UK. antonio.remiro-azocar@bayer.com.

BMC Medical Research Methodology
|August 8, 2022
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

A new two-stage matching-adjusted indirect comparison (2SMAIC) improves precision and efficiency over standard MAIC for health technology assessments. This method is particularly useful when individual patient data (IPD) sample sizes are small, enhancing reimbursement decision-making.

Keywords:
Covariate adjustmentCovariate balanceEvidence synthesisHealth technology assessmentIndirect treatment comparisonInverse probability of treatment weightingMatching-adjusted indirect comparison

More Related Videos

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons
07:13

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

Published on: November 9, 2018

11.0K
A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments
08:12

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments

Published on: March 1, 2022

2.6K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Sep 2, 2025

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups
14:14

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups

Published on: May 13, 2022

6.0K
A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons
07:13

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

Published on: November 9, 2018

11.0K
A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments
08:12

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments

Published on: March 1, 2022

2.6K

Area of Science:

  • Health Economics
  • Biostatistics
  • Comparative Effectiveness Research

Background:

  • Anchored covariate-adjusted indirect comparisons are crucial for reimbursement decisions without head-to-head trials.
  • Matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) is widely used but can lack precision and efficiency with small effective sample sizes.
  • Limitations in patient-level data necessitate robust indirect comparison methods.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To introduce and evaluate a novel two-stage matching-adjusted indirect comparison (2SMAIC) method.
  • To enhance the precision and efficiency of covariate-adjusted indirect comparisons.
  • To provide a method applicable even with limited individual patient data (IPD).

Main Methods:

  • Developed a two-stage approach (2SMAIC) combining propensity score weighting and trial assignment modeling.
  • Estimated treatment and trial assignment mechanisms using parametric models.
  • Investigated the use of weight truncation in conjunction with MAIC and 2SMAIC through simulation studies.

Main Results:

  • 2SMAIC demonstrated improved precision and efficiency compared to standard MAIC across all simulated scenarios, with low bias.
  • The two-stage approach effectively managed low IPD sample sizes and chance imbalances in covariates.
  • Combining 2SMAIC with weight truncation yielded the greatest precision and efficiency gains, though with potential bias.

Conclusions:

  • Two-stage MAIC approaches significantly enhance precision and efficiency by adjusting for covariate imbalances in IPD.
  • 2SMAIC offers a valuable extension for health technology assessment, especially with limited IPD.
  • Future modules could further improve variance reduction and address missing data or non-compliance.