A selection model for accounting for publication bias in a full network meta-analysis

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 33, Issue 30, 2014, Pages 5399-5412

  Mavridis, Dimitris ^a,b   Welton, Nicky J ^c   Sutton, Alex ^d   Salanti, Georgia ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOANNINA   (Greece)

^b UNIVERSITY OF IOANNINA   (Greece)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Consistency; Mixed treatment comparison; Propensity for publication; Publication bias; Study design

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; HEALTH CARE; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); PROBABILITY; PUBLICATION; PUBLISHING; QUANTITATIVE STUDY; SELECTION BIAS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; DRUG COMBINATION; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; PROCEDURES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); SAMPLE SIZE;

ACETYLSALICYLIC ACID; ANTITHROMBOCYTIC AGENT; DIPYRIDAMOLE; DRUG COMBINATION; PLACEBO;

ASPIRIN; BAYES THEOREM; DIPYRIDAMOLE; DRUG COMBINATIONS; HUMANS; MARKOV CHAINS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; PLACEBOS; PLATELET AGGREGATION INHIBITORS; PUBLICATION BIAS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN; SAMPLE SIZE;

EID: 84918590677     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.6321     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Caldwell DM, Ades AE, Higgins JP. Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence. BMJ 2005; 331:897-900.
2. Higgins JPT, Whitehead A. Borrowing strength from external trials in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 1996; 15:2733-2749.
3. Lu G, Ades AE. Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Statistics in Medicine: 2004; 23:3105-3124.
4. Salanti G, Higgins JPT, Ades AE, Ioannidis JPA. Evaluation of networks of randomized trials. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2008; 17:279-301.
5. Bafeta A, Trinquart L, Seror R, Ravaud P. Analysis of the systematic reviews process in reports of network meta-analyses: methodological systematic review. BMJ 2013; 347:f3675. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f3675.
6. Lee AW. Review of mixed treatment comparisons in published systematic reviews shows marked increase since 2009. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2014; 67(2):138-143.
7. Nikolakopoulou A, Chaimani A, Veroniki AA, Vasiliadis HS, Schmid CH, Salanti G. Characteristics of networks of interventions: a description of a database of 186 published networks. PLoS One 2014; 9:e86754. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0086754.
8. Dias S, Welton NJ, Caldwell DM, Ades AE. Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2010; 29:932-944.
9. Salanti G. Indirect and mixed-treatment comparison, network, or multiple-treatments meta-analysis : many names, many benefits, many concerns for the next generation evidence synthesis school. Research Synthesis Method 2012; 3:80-97.
10. 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.
11. 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(8):857-864.
12. Sutton AJ, Song F, Gilbody SM, Abrams KR. Moddeling publication bias in meta-analysis : a review. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2000; 9:421-445.
13. Thornton LP. Publication bias in meta analysis : its causes and consequences. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2000; 53:207-216.
14. Chaimani A, Vasiliadis HS, Pandis N, Schmid CH, Welton NJ, Salanti G. Effects of study precision and risk of bias in networks of interventions: a network meta-epidemiological study. International Journal of Epidemiology 2013; 42:1120-1131.
15. Egger M, Smith GD, Scheider M, Minder C. Bias in meta analysis detected by a simple graphical test. BMJ 1997; 315:629-634.
16. Moreno SG, Sutton AJ, Ades AE, Stanley TD, Abrams KR, Peters JL, Cooper NJ. Assessment of regression-based methods to adjust for publication bias through a comprehensive simulation study. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2009; 9:2. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-9-2.
17. Chaimani A, Higgins JP, Mavridis D, Spyridonos P, Salanti G. Graphical tools for network meta-analysis in STATA. PLoS One 2013; 8:e76654. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0076654.
18. Copas J, Shi JQ. Meta-analysis, funnel plots and sensitivity analysis. Biostatistics 2000; 1(3):247-262.
19. Copas JB. What works? Selectivity models and meta-analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Seies A 1999; 162(1):95-109.
20. Copas JB, Shi JQ. A sensitivity analysis for publication bias in systematic reviews. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2001; 10:251-265.
21. Heckman JJ. Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica 1979; 47:153-161.
22. Carpenter JR, Schwarzer G, Rucker G, Kunstler R. Empirical evaluation showed that the Copas selection model provided a useful summary in 80% of meta-analyses. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2009; 62:624-631.
23. Schwarzer G, Carpenter J, Rucker G. Empirical evaluation suggests Copas selection model preferable to trim-and-fill method for selection bias in meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2010; 63:282-288.
24. Chootrakool H, Shi JQ, Yue R. Meta-analysis and sensitivity analysis for multi-arm trials with selection bias. Statistics in Medicine 2011; 30:1183-1198.
25. Mavridis D, Sutton A, Cipriani A, Salanti G. A fully Bayesian application of the Copas selection model for publication bias extended to network meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2013; 32:51-66.
26. Higgins JPT, Jackson D, Barrett JK, Ades A, White IR. Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: concepts and models for multi-arm studies. Research Synthesis Method 2012; 3:98-110.
27. White IR, Barrett JK, Jackson D, Higgins JPT. Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: model estimation using multivariate meta-regression. Research Synthesis Methods 2012; 3:111-125.
28. Djulbegovic B, Lacevic M, Cantor A, Fields KK, Bennett CL, Adams JR, Kuderer NM, GH Lyman . The uncertainty principle and industry-sponsored research. Lancet 2000; 356:635-638.
29. Lundh A, Sismondo S, Lexchin J, Busuioc OA, Bero L. Industry sponsorship and research outcome. Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews 2012. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.MR000033.pub2.
30. Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE, Walter SD. The results of direct and indirect treament comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1997; 50:683-691.
31. Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Caldwell DM, Lu G, Ades A. Inconsistency in networkds of evidence based on randomized controlled trials. Medical Desicion Making 2013; 33(5):641-656.
32. Lu G, Ades AE. Assessing evidence inconsistency in mixed treatment comparisons. Journal of the American Statistical Association 2006; 101:447-459.
33. Konig J, Krahn U, Binder H. Visualizing the flow of evidence in network meta-analysis and characterizing mixed treatment comparisons. Statistics in Medicine 2013; 32:5414-5429.
34. Krahn U, Binder H, Konig J. A graphical tool for locating inconsistency in network meta-analyses. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2013; 13:35.
35. Franchini AJ, Dias S, Ades AE, Jansen JP, Welton NJ. Accounting for correlation in network meta-analysis with multi-arm trials. Research Synthesis Method (Special issue on network meta-analysis) 2012; 3:142-160.
36. Copas JB. A likelihood-based sensitivity analysis for publication bias in meta-analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, series C 2013; 62:47-66.
37. Chaimani A, Salanti G. Using network meta-analysis to evaluate the existence of small-study effects in a network of interventions. Reserach Synthesis Methods 2012; 3:161-176.
38. Salanti G, Ades A, Ioannidis J. Graphical methods and numerical summariesfor presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2011; 64:163-171.
39. Gelman R. Prior distributions for variance parameters in hierarchical models. Bayesian Analysis 2006; 1:515-534.
40. Peters JL, Sutton AJ, Jones DR, Abrams KR, Rushton L. Contour-enhanced meta-analysis funnel plots help distinguish publication bias from other causes of asymmetry. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2008; 61:991-996.
41. Chan AW, Altman DG. Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomised trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors. British Medical Journal 2005; 330:753. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38356.424606.8F.