Planning future studies based on the precision of network meta-analysis results

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 35, Issue 7, 2016, Pages 978-1000

  Nikolakopoulou, Adriani ^a   Mavridis, Dimitris ^a,b   Salanti, Georgia ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOANNINA   (Greece)

^b UNIVERSITY OF IOANNINA   (Greece)

Author keywords

Clinical trial design; Indirect evidence; Network meta analysis; Precision; Sample size

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER THERAPY; HUMAN; INJECTION; LIVER CELL CARCINOMA; MEASUREMENT PRECISION; METHODOLOGY; MORTALITY; NETWORK META ANALYSIS; PERCUTANEOUS ACETIC ACID INJECTION; PERCUTANEOUS ETHANOL INJECTION; RADIOFREQUENCY ABLATION; SAMPLE SIZE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STUDY DESIGN; BIOSTATISTICS; CARCINOMA, HEPATOCELLULAR; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; LIVER NEOPLASMS; NETWORK META-ANALYSIS; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

BIOSTATISTICS; CARCINOMA, HEPATOCELLULAR; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; LIVER NEOPLASMS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NETWORK META-ANALYSIS; PRECISION MEDICINE; SAMPLE SIZE;

EID: 84959501663     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.6608     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WMC, Gray JAM, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ 1996; 312:71-72.
2. Clarke M. Doing new research? Don't forget the old. PLoS Medicine 2004; 1:e35.
3. Clarke M, Hopewell S, Chalmers I. Clinical trials should begin and end with systematic reviews of relevant evidence: 12 years and waiting. Lancet 2010; 376:20-21.
4. Clarke M, Hopewell S, Chalmers I. Reports of clinical trials should begin and end with up-to-date systematic reviews of other relevant evidence: a status report. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 2007; 100:187-190.
5. Roloff V, Higgins JPT, Sutton AJ. Planning future studies based on the conditional power of a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2013; 32:11-24.
6. Ferreira ML, Herbert RD, Crowther MJ, Verhagen A, Sutton AJ. When is a further clinical trial justified? BMJ 2012; 345:e5913.
7. Sutton AJ, Cooper NJ, Jones DR, Lambert PC, Thompson JR, Abrams KR. Evidence-based sample size calculations based upon updated meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2007; 26:2479-2500.
8. Fergusson D, Glass KC, Hutton B, Shapiro S. Randomized controlled trials of aprotinin in cardiac surgery: could clinical equipoise have stopped the bleeding? Clinical Trials London England 2005; 2:218-229. discussion 229-232.
9. Young C, Horton R. Putting clinical trials into context. The Lancet 2005; 366:107-108.
10. Clark S, Horton R. Putting research into context-revisited. The Lancet 2010; 376:10-11.
11. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group . Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine 2009; 6(7):e1000097. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.
12. Higgins JP, Green S, Scholten RJ. Maintaining reviews: updates, amendments and feedback. In Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Higgins JP, Green S (eds). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Chichester, UK, 2008; 31-49.
13. Takwoingi Y, Hopewell S, Tovey D, Sutton AJ. A multicomponent decision tool for prioritising the updating of systematic reviews. BMJ 2013; 347:f7191.
14. Ahmadzai N, Newberry SJ, Maglione MA, Tsertsvadze A, Ansari MT, Hempel S, Motala A, Tsouros S, Schneider Chafen JJ, Shanman R, Moher D, Shekelle PG. A surveillance system to assess the need for updating systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews 2013; 2:104.
15. Elliott JH, Turner T, Clavisi O, Thomas J, Higgins JPT, Mavergames C, Gruen RL. Living systematic reviews: an emerging opportunity to narrow the evidence-practice gap. PLoS Medicine 2014; 11:e1001603.
16. Langan D, Higgins JPT, Gregory W, Sutton AJ. Graphical augmentations to the funnel plot assess the impact of additional evidence on a meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2012; 65:511-519.
17. Germani G, Pleguezuelo M, Gurusamy K, Meyer T, Isgrò G, Burroughs AK. Clinical outcomes of radiofrequency ablation, percutaneous alcohol and acetic acid injection for hepatocelullar carcinoma: a meta-analysis. Journal of Hepatology 2010; 52:380-388.
18. Lu G, Welton NJ, Higgins JPT, White IR, Ades AE. Linear inference for mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis: a two-stage approach. Research Synthesis Methods 2011; 2:43-60.
19. Caldwell DM, Ades AE, Higgins JPT. Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence. BMJ 2005; 331:897-900.
20. 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 tool. Research Synthesis Methods 2012; 3:80-97.
21. Kulinskaya E, Wood J. Trial sequential methods for meta-analysis: trial sequential methods for meta-analysis. Research Synthesis Methods 2014; 5:212-220.
22. 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. Research Synthesis Methods 2012; 3:98-110.
23. 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.
24. Jansen JP, Naci H. Is network meta-analysis as valid as standard pairwise meta-analysis? It all depends on the distribution of effect modifiers. BMC Medicine 2013; 11:159.
25. Lu G, Ades AE. Assessing evidence inconsistency in mixed treatment comparisons. Journal of the American Statistical Association 2006; 101:447-459.
26. Higgins JP, Whitehead A. Borrowing strength from external trials in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 1996; 15:2733-2749.
27. König 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.
28. Krahn U, Binder H. A graphical tool for locating inconsistency in network meta-analyses. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2013; 13:35.
29. Turner RM, Davey J, Clarke MJ, Thompson SG, Higgins JP. Predicting the extent of heterogeneity in meta-analysis, using empirical data from the Cochrane database of systematic reviews. International Journal of Epidemiology 2012; 41:818-827.
30. Rhodes KM, Turner RM, Higgins JPT. Predictive distributions were developed for the extent of heterogeneity in meta-analyses of continuous outcome data. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2015; 68:52-60.
31. Nikolakopoulou A, Mavridis D, Salanti G. Using conditional power of network meta-analysis (NMA) to inform the design of future clinical trials. Biometrical Journal 2014; 56:973-990.
32. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2002; 21:1539-1558.
33. Jackson D, White IR, Riley RD. Quantifying the impact of between-study heterogeneity in multivariate meta-analyses. Statistics in Medicine 2012; 31:3805-3820.
34. Salanti G, Ades AE, Ioannidis JP. Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2011; 64(1878-5921 (Electronic)):163-171.
35. Kibret T, Richer D, Beyene J. Bias in identification of the best treatment in a Bayesian network meta-analysis for binary outcome: a simulation study. Clinical Epidemiology 2014; 6:451-460.
36. Inman HF, Bradley EL. The overlapping coefficient as a measure of agreement between probability distributions and point estimation of the overlap of two normal densities. Communications in Statistics - Theory Methods 1989; 18:3851-3874.
37. Pollard D. A User's Guide to Measure Theoretic Probability, Cambridge Series in Statistical and Probabilistic Mathematics. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, New York, 2002.
38. McDaid C, Maund E, Rice S, Wright K, Jenkins B, Woolacott N. Paracetamol and selective and non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the reduction of morphine-related side effects after major surgery: a systematic review. Health Technology Assessment Winch England 2010; 14:1-153. iii-iv.
39. 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. Medical Decision Making International Journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making 2013; 33:641-656.
40. 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.
41. Salanti G, Higgins JPT, Ades AE, Ioannidis JPA. Evaluation of networks of randomized trials. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2008; 17:279-301.
42. Naci H, O'Connor AB. Assessing comparative effectiveness of new drugs before approval using prospective network meta-analyses. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2013; 66:812-816.
43. Kjaergard LL, Villumsen J, Gluud C. Reported methodologic quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-analyses. Annals of Internal Medicine 2001; 135:982-989.
44. Claxton. Expected health benefits of additional evidence PCORI 121212.pdf.
45. Welton NJ, Madan J, Ades AE. Are head-to-head trials of biologics needed? The role of value of information methods in arthritis research. Rheumatology Oxford England 2011; 50 Suppl 4:iv19-25.
46. Rücker G, Schwarzer G. Reduce dimension or reduce weights? Comparing two approaches to multi-arm studies in network meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2014; 33:4353-4369.
47. Rhodes KM, Turner RM, Higgins JPT. Predictive distributions were developed for the extent of heterogeneity in meta-analyses of continuous outcome data. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2015; 68(1): 52-60.