Use of generalized linear mixed models for network meta-analysis

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 34, Issue 7, 2014, Pages 911-918

  Tu, Yu Kang ^a  

^a NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

generalized linear mixed models.; mixed treatments comparisons; network meta analysis; randomized controlled trials

Indexed keywords

EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); PROCEDURES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); STATISTICAL MODEL;

EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84907609322     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: 1552681X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X14545789     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Sutton AJ, Higgins JPT. Recent developments in meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2008 ; 27 (5). 625-50
2. Lumley T. Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2002 ; 21 (16). 2313-24
3. Lu G, Welton NJ, Higgins JPT, White IR, Ades AE. Linear inference for mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis: a two-stage approach. Res Synth Methods. 2011 ; 2 (1). 43-60
4. Dias S, Sutton AJ, Ades AE, Welton NJ. Evidence synthesis for decision making 2: a generalized linear modeling framework for pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Making. 2013 ; 33 (5). 607-17
5. Jansen JP, Fleurence R, Devine B, et al. 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. Value Health. 2011 ; 14 (4). 417-28
6. Lu G, Ades AE. Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2004 ; 23 (20). 3105-24
7. Jones B, Roger J, Lane PW, et al. Statistical approaches for conducting network meta-analysis in drug development. Pharm Stat. 2011 ; 10 (6). 523-31
8. Song F, Altman DG, Glenny A-M, Deeks JJ. Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003 ; 326 (7387). 472
9. Song F, Loke YK, Walsh T, Glenny A-M, Eastwood AJ, Altman DG. Methodological problems in the use of indirect comparisons for evaluating healthcare interventions: survey of published systematic reviews. BMJ. 2009 ; 338 (7700). b1147
10. Glenny A-M, Altman D, Song F, et al. Indirect Comparisons of Competing Interventions. Health Technology Assessment. 2005 ; 9 (26). 1-148
11. Dias S, Welton NJ, Caldwell DM, Ades AE. Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2010 ; 29 (7-8). 932-44
12. Higgins JPT, Jackson D, Barrett JK, Lu G, Ades AE, White IR. Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: concepts and models for multi-arm studies. Res Synth Methods. 2012 ; 3 (2). 98-110
13. Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Caldwell DM, Lu G, Ades AE. Evidence synthesis for decision making 4: inconsistency in networks of evidence based on randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Making. 2013 ; 33 (5). 641-56
14. Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE, Walter SD. The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997 ; 50 (6). 683-91
15. Hasselblad V. Meta-analysis of multitreatment studies. Med Decis Making. 1998 ; 18 (1). 37-43
16. Donegan S, Williamson P, D'Alessandro U, Tudur Smith C. Assessing key assumptions of network meta-analysis: a review of methods. Res Synth Methods. 2013 ; 4 (4). 291-323
17. Senn S, Gavini F, Magrez D, Scheen A. Issues in performing a network meta-analysis. Stat Methods Med Res. 2013 ; 22 (2). 169-89
18. Cipriani A, Higgins JPT, Geddes JR, Salanti G. Conceptual and technical challenges in network meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2013 ; 159 (2). 130-7
19. Lee AW. Review of mixed treatment comparisons in published systematic reviews shows marked increase since 2009. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014 ; 67 (2). 138-43
20. Hong H, Carlin BP, Shamliyan TA, et al. Comparing Bayesian and frequentist approaches for multiple outcome mixed treatment comparisons. Med Decis Making. 2013 ; 33 (5). 702-14
21. Hoaglin DC, Hawkins N, Jansen JP, et al. Conducting indirect-treatment-comparison and network-meta-analysis studies: report of the ISPOR task force on indirect treatment comparisons good research practices: part 2. Value Health.. 2011 ; 14 (4). 429-37
22. Senn S. The many modes of meta. Drug Inf J. 2000 ; 34 (2). 535-49
23. Colditz GA, Brewer TF, Berkey CS, et al. Efficacy of BCG vaccine in the prevention of tuberculosis: meta-analysis of the published literature. JAMA. 1994 ; 271 (9). 698-702
24. Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, Rothstein HR Introduction to Meta-Analysis. Borenstein M Hedges LV Higgins JPT Rothstein HR, ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons ; 2009: 187-203.
25. Harris R, Bradburn M, Deeks J, Harbord R, Altman D, Sterne J. metan: fixed- and random-effects meta-analysis. Stata J. 2008 ; 8 (1). 3-28
26. Smith TC, Spiegelhalter DJ, Thomas A. Bayesian approaches to random-effects meta-analysis: a comparative study. Stat Med. 1995 ; 14 (24). 2685-99
27. Piepho HP, Williams ER, Madden LV. The use of two-way linear mixed models in multitreatment meta-analysis. Biometrics. 2012 ; 68 (4). 1269-77
28. Pagliaro L, D'Amico G, Sörensen TIA, et al. Prevention of first bleeding in cirrhosis: a meta-analysis of randomized trials of nonsurgical treatment. Ann Intern Med. 1992 ; 117 (1). 59-70
29. White IR. Multivariate random-effects meta-regression: updates to mvmeta. Stata J. 2011 ; 11 (2). 255-70
30. White IR, Barrett JK, Jackson D, Higgins JPT. Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: model estimation using multivariate meta-regression. Res Synth Methods. 2012 ; 3 (2). 111-25
31. Biondi-Zoccai G, D'Ascenzo F Network Meta-Analysis: Evidence Synthesis with Mixed Treatment Comparison. Biondi-Zoccai G, ed. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers ; 2014: 101-13.