Concepedia

Transitivity Assumption

Transitivity Assumption is a foundational methodological principle in network meta-analysis that stipulates the consistency of relative treatment effects across different studies, such that the indirect comparison between two treatments through a common comparator is valid under the assumption that all relevant effect modifiers are similarly distributed across the compared interventions.

152

Publications

9.4K

Citations

308

Authors

216

Institutions

Publications per year

2017–2026

32

Parents

Publications

152

Interpreting Indirect Treatment Comparisons and Network Meta-Analysis for Health-Care Decision Making: Report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: Part 1

Jeroen P. Jansen, Rachael Fleurence, Beth Devine et al. · Value in Health · 2011 · 1K citations · Full text

, , +16

Conducting Indirect-Treatment-Comparison and Network-Meta-Analysis Studies: Report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: Part 2

David C. Hoaglin, Neil Hawkins, Jeroen P. Jansen et al. · Value in Health · 2011 · 767 citations · Full text

, , +15

Structure of growing social networks

Emily Jin, Michelle Girvan, M. E. J. Newman · Physical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics · 2001 · 505 citations

, , +16

Cardinal Consistency of Reciprocal Preference Relations: A Characterization of Multiplicative Transitivity

Francisco Chiclana, Enrique Herrera‐Viedma, Sergio Alonso et al. · IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems · 2008 · 404 citations

, , +15

Preference Reversals and the Independence Axiom

Charles A. Holt · American Economic Review · 1986 · 351 citations

, , +11

1–5 of 152

Authors

308

  1. MG
    Michelle Girvan

    University of Maryland, College Park, United States

    2 publications · 526 citations

    2

    h-index

  2. FH
    Frank Harary

    University of Michigan, United States

    2 publications · 108 citations

    2

    h-index

  3. MO
    M. O’Keeffe

    Arizona State University, United States

    2 publications · 29 citations

    2

    h-index

  4. SL
    Sifeng Liu

    Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, China

    2 publications · 27 citations

    2

    h-index

  5. RP
    Robert P. Parks

    Washington University in St. Louis, United States

    2 publications · 34 citations

    2

    h-index

1–5 of 308

Institutions

216

  1. Arizona State University

    Tempe, United States

    5 h-index

    4 publications

    173 citations

  2. Harvard University

    Cambridge, United States

    3 h-index

    5 publications

    611 citations

  3. University of California, Berkeley

    Berkeley, United States

    3 h-index

    5 publications

    381 citations

  4. Chinese Academy of Sciences

    Beijing, China

    3 h-index

    3 publications

    253 citations

  5. Durham University

    Durham, United Kingdom

    2 h-index

    2 publications

    46 citations

  6. Pfizer (United States)

    New York, United States

    2 h-index

    2 publications

    1.8K citations

  7. National Bureau of Economic Research

    Cambridge, United States

    2 h-index

    2 publications

    53 citations

  8. Stanford University

    Stanford, United States

    2 h-index

    4 publications

    344 citations

1–8 of 216

Venues

  1. Fuzzy Sets and Systems

    4 publications · 404 citations

    4

    h-index

  2. Analysis

    4 publications · 82 citations

    4

    h-index

  3. Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems

    3 publications · 89 citations

    3

    h-index

  4. Value in Health

    2 publications · 1.8K citations

    2

    h-index

  5. Information Sciences

    2 publications · 48 citations

    2

    h-index

1–5