Extending methods for investigating the relationship between treatment effect and baseline risk from pairwise meta-analysis to network meta-analysis

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 32, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 752-771

  Achana, Felix A ^a   Cooper, Nicola J ^a   Dias, Sofia ^b   Lu, Guobing ^b   Rice, Stephen J C ^c   Kendrick, Denise ^d   Sutton, Alex J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Baseline risk; MCMC; Meta regression; Mixed treatment comparison; Network meta analysis; Underlying risk

Indexed keywords

MORPHINE;

ALARM MONITORING; ANALGESIA; ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; BINOMIAL DISTRIBUTION; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; HOME SAFETY; HUMAN; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREDICTION; PROBABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

ANALGESICS, OPIOID; ANTI-INFLAMMATORY AGENTS, NON-STEROIDAL; BAYES THEOREM; BIOSTATISTICS; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; CYCLOOXYGENASE 2 INHIBITORS; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; MORPHINE; PAIN, POSTOPERATIVE; RISK; SAFETY; SMOKE; SOFTWARE;

EID: 84873420647     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.5539     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Sutton A, Abrams K, Jones DR, Sheldon TA, Song F. Methods for Meta-analysis in Medical Research. Wiley: Chichester, 2000.
2. Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, Rothstein HR. Introduction to Meta-Analysis. Wiley: Hoboken, 2009.
3. Higgins JPT, Green SE (eds). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from "http://www.cochrane-handbook.org" [Accessed 10 December 2011].
4. Thompson SG, Smith TC, Sharp SJ. Investigating underlying risk as a source of heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 1997; 16:2741-2758.
5. Cooper NJ, Sutton AJ, Morris D, Ades AE, Welton NJ. Addressing between-study heterogeneity and inconsistency in mixed treatment comparisons: application to stroke prevention treatments in individuals with non-rheumatic atrial fibrillation. Statistics in Medicine 2009; 28:1861-1881.
6. Brand R, Kragt H. Importance of trends in the interpretation of an overall odds ratio in the meta-analysis of clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine 1992; 11:2077-2082.
7. Sharp SJ, Thompson SG, Altman DG. The relation between treatment benefit and underlying risk in meta-analysis. BMJ 1996; 313:735-738.
8. Walter SD. Variation in baseline risk as an explanation of heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 1997; 16:2883-2900.
9. McIntosh MW. The population risk as an explanatory variable in research synthesis of clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine 1996; 15:1713-1728.
10. Sharp SJ, Thompson SG. Analysing the relationship between treatment effect and underlying risk in meta-analysis: comparison and development of approaches. Statistics in Medicine 2000; 19:3251-3274.
11. Arends LR, Hoes AW, Lubsen J, Grobbee DE, Stijnen T. Baseline risk as predictor of treatment benefit: three clinical meta-re-analyses. Statistics in Medicine 2000; 19:3497-3518.
12. van Houwelingen HC, Arends LR, Stijnen T. Advanced methods in meta-analysis: multivariate approach and meta-regression. Statistics in Medicine 2002; 21:589-624.
13. Salanti G, Higgins JP, Ades AE, Ioannidis JP. Evaluation of networks of randomized trials. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2008; 17:279-301.
14. Salanti G, Marinho V, Higgins JP. A case study of multiple-treatments meta-analysis demonstrates that covariates should be considered. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2009; 62:857-864.
15. Dias S, Sutton AJ, Welton NJ, Ades AE. NICE DSU Technical Support Document 3: Heterogeneity: subgroups, meta-regression, bias and bias-adjustment, 2011. Available from: http://www.nicedsu.org.uk [Accessed 8 November 2011].
16. Stijnen T, Hamza TH, Ozdemir P. Random effects meta-analysis of event outcome in the framework of the generalized linear mixed model with applications in sparse data. Statistics in Medicine 2010; 29:3046-3067.
17. Cooper NJ, Kendrick D, Achana F, Dhiman P, He Z, Wynn P, Le Cozannet E, Saramago P, Sutton AJ. Network meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to increase the uptake of smoke alarms. Epidemiologic Reviews 2011; 34:32-45.
18. McDaid C, Maund E, Rice S, Wright K, Jenkins B, Woolacott N. Paracetamol and selective and non-selective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the reduction of morphine-related side effects after major surgery: a systematic review. Health Technology Assessment 2010; 14:1-153.
19. Ghidey W, Stijnen T, van Houwelingen HC. Modelling the effect of baseline risk in meta-analysis: a review from the perspective of errors-in-variables regression. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2011. DOI: 10.1177/0962280211412244.
20. van Houwelingen H, Senn S. Investigating underlying risk as a source of heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 1999; 18:110-115.
21. Ghidey W, Lesaffre E, Stijnen T. Semi-parametric modelling of the distribution of the baseline risk in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2007; 26:5434-5444.
22. Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Ades AE. NICE DSU Technical Support Document 2: A generalised linear modelling framework for pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials, 2011. Available from: http://www.nicedsu.org.uk [Accessed 8 November 2011].
23. Lu G, Ades AE. Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Statistics in Medicine 2004; 23:3105-3124.
24. Caldwell DM, Ades AE, Higgins JP. Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence. BMJ 2005; 331:897-900.
25. Dias S, Welton NJ, Caldwell DM, Ades AE. Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2010; 29:932-944.
26. Lu G, Ades AE. Assessing evidence inconsistency in mixed treatment comparisons. Journal of the American Statistical Association 2006; 101:447-459.
27. Spiegelhalter D, Thomas AB, Best N, Lunn D. WinBUGS User Manual Version 1.4 January 2003. Upgraded to Version 1.4.3, 2007.
28. Lunn DJ, Thomas A, Best N, Spiegelhalter D. WinBUGS-a Bayesian modelling framework: concepts, structure, and extensibility. Statistics and Computing 2000; 10:325-337.
29. Draper NR, Smith H. Applied Regression Analysis, 3rd edn. Academic Press: London, 1998.
30. Lu GB, Ades A. Modeling between-trial variance structure in mixed treatment comparisons. Biostatistics 2009; 10:792-805.
31. Berkey CS, Hoaglin DC, Antczak-Bouckoms A, Mosteller F, Colditz GA. Meta-analysis of multiple outcomes by regression with random effects. Statistics in Medicine 1998; 17:2537-2550.
32. Spiegelhalter DJ, Best NG, Carlin BP, van der Linde A. Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society (B) 2002; 64:1-34.
33. Lu G, Ades AE, Sutton AJ, Cooper NJ, BriggS AH, Caldwell DM. Meta-analysis of mixed treatment comparisons at multiple follow-up times. Statistics in Medicine 2007; 26:3681-3699.
34. Caldwell DM, Welton NJ, Ades AE. Mixed treatment comparison analysis provides internally coherent treatment effect estimates based on overviews of reviews and can reveal inconsistency. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2010; 63:875-882.
35. Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Ades AE, 2011. NICE DSU Technical Support Document 2: A Generalised Linear Modelling Framework for Pairwise and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials. 2011. Available from:http://www.nicedsu.org.uk. [Accessed 8 November 2011].
36. Ntzoufras I. Bayesian Modelling Using WinBUGS. John Wiley & Sons: New Jersey, 2009.
37. Mason AJ. Bayesian methods for modelling non-random missing data mechanisms in longitudinal studies. PhD Thesis, Imperial College, UK, 2009.