Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 18, 2026

Quantifying Mixing using Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Published on: January 25, 2012
AppRaise: Software for Quantifying Evidence Uncertainty in Systematic Reviews Using a Posterior Mixture Model
1Health Technology Assessment Unit, Acute and Hospital-Based Care Portfolio, Ontario Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Rationale:
Systematic reviews are essential for evidence-based healthcare decision-making. While it is relatively straightforward to quantitatively assess random errors in systematic reviews, as these are typically reported in primary studies, the assessment of biases often remains narrative. Primary studies seldom provide quantitative estimates of biases and their uncertainties, resulting in systematic reviews rarely including such measurements. Additionally, evidence appraisers often face time constraints and technical challenges that prevent them from conducting quantitative bias assessments themselves. Given that multiple biases and random errors collectively skew the point estimate from the truth, it is important to incorporate comprehensive quantitative methods of uncertainty in systematic reviews. These methods should integrate random errors and biases into a unified measure of uncertainty and be easily accessible to evidence appraisers, preferably through user-friendly software.
Aims And Objectives:
To address this need, we propose a posterior mixture model and introduce AppRaise, a free, web-based interactive software designed to implement this approach.
Methods:
We showcase its application through a health technology assessment (HTA) report on the effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring in reducing A1c levels among individuals with type 1 diabetes.
Results:
Applying the AppRaise software to the HTA report revealed a high level of certainty (86% probability) that continuous glucose monitoring would, on average, result in a reduction in A1c levels compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose among Ontarians with type 1 diabetes. These findings were similar to other quantitative bias-adjusted approaches in systematic reviews.
Conclusion:
AppRaise can be utilized as a standalone tool or as a complement to validate the quality of evidence assessed using qualitative-based scoring methods. This approach is also useful for assessing the sensitivity of parameter estimates to potential biases introduced by primary studies.
More Related Videos
10:22Split Point Analysis and Uncertainty Quantification of Thermal-Optical Organic/Elemental Carbon Measurements
Published on: September 7, 2019
13:54A Workflow for Lipid Nanoparticle LNP Formulation Optimization using Designed Mixture-Process Experiments and Self-Validated Ensemble Models SVEM
Published on: August 18, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Uncertainty: Confidence Intervals
Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error
One-Compartment Open Model: Wagner-Nelson and Loo Riegelman Method for ka Estimation
On...
Quantifying and Rejecting Outliers: The Grubbs Test
Uncertainty: Overview
Interpretation of Confidence Intervals
Confidence intervals have confidence coefficients that are crucial for their interpretation. The most common confidence coefficients are 0.90, 0.95, and 0.99, which can be written as percentages–90%, 95%, and 99%, respectively.
Suppose a person calculates a confidence interval with a confidence coefficient of 0.95. In that case, they can...