Network meta-analysis: an introduction for clinicians

Internal and Emergency Medicine

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 103-111

  Rouse, Benjamin ^a   Chaimani, Anna ^b   Li, Tianjing ^a  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF IOANNINA   (Greece)

Author keywords

Comparative effectiveness; Multiple treatment meta analysis; Network meta analysis; Transitivity

Indexed keywords

HUMAN; LITERATURE; METHODOLOGY; NETWORK META-ANALYSIS; RESEARCH; STANDARDS; STATISTICAL MODEL;

HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NETWORK META-ANALYSIS; RESEARCH; RESEARCH DESIGN; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 85001053534     PISSN: 18280447     EISSN: 19709366     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11739-016-1583-7     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Sinclair JC et al (1995) Users’ guides to the medical literature. IX. A method for grading health care recommendations. Evidence-based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 274:1800–1804. doi:10.1001/jama.281.21.2029
2. Brighton B, Bhandari M, Tornetta P, Felson DT (2003) Hierarchy of evidence: from case reports to randomized controlled trials. Clin Orthop Relat Res. doi:10.1097/01.blo.0000079323.41006.12
3. Evans D (2003) Hierarchy of evidence: a framework for ranking evidence evaluating healthcare interventions. J Clin Nurs 12:77–84. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2702.2003.00662.x
4. Cipriani A, Higgins JPT, Geddes JR, Salanti G (2013) Conceptual and technical challenges in network meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 159:130–137. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-159-2-201307160-00008
5. Biondi-Zoccai G, Abbate A, Benedetto U et al (2015) Network meta-analysis for evidence synthesis: what is it and why is it posed to dominate cardiovascular decision making? Int J Cardiol 182:309–314. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.01.023
6. Salanti G (2012) Indirect and mixed-treatment comparison, network, or multiple-treatments meta-analysis: many names, many benefits, many concerns for the next generation evidence synthesis tool. Res Synth Methods 3:80–97. doi:10.1002/jrsm.1037
7. Li T, Puhan MA, Vedula SS et al (2011) Network meta-analysis-highly attractive but more methodological research is needed. BMC Med 9:79. doi:10.1186/1741-7015-9-79
8. Li T, Lindsley K, Rouse B et al (2016) Comparative effectiveness of first-line medications for primary open-angle glaucoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Ophthalmology 123:129–140. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.09.005
9. Michelessi M, Lindsley K, Yu T, Li T (2014) Combination medical treatment for primary open angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension: a network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD011366
10. Yu Q, Zhu Z, Liu Y et al (2015) Efficacy and safety of HER2-targeted agents for breast cancer with HER2-overexpression: a network meta-analysis. PLoS One 10:e0127404. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0127404
11. Russell R, Chung M, Balk EM et al (2009) Issues and challenges in conducting systematic reviews to support development of nutrient reference values: workshop summary. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), Rockville
12. Caldwell DM (2014) An overview of conducting systematic reviews with network meta-analysis. Syst Rev 3:109. doi:10.1186/2046-4053-3-109
13. Mavridis D, Giannatsi M, Cipriani A, Salanti G (2015) A primer on network meta-analysis with emphasis on mental health. Evid Based Ment Heal 18:40–46. doi:10.1136/eb-2015-102088
14. Sturtz S, Bender R (2012) Unsolved issues of mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis: network size and inconsistency. Res Synth Methods 3:300–311. doi:10.1002/jrsm.1057
15. Li L, Tian J, Tian H et al (2014) Network meta-analyses could be improved by searching more sources and by involving a librarian. J Clin Epidemiol 67:1001–1007. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.04.003
16. Mills EJ, Thorlund K, Ioannidis JP (2013) Demystifying trial networks and network meta-analysis. BMJ Br Med J 2914:10–15. doi:10.1136/bmj.f2914
17. Deeks JJ, Higgins JP, Altman DG (2011) Chapter 9. Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses, Cochrane Handb Syst Rev Interv
18. Higgins JPT, Jackson D, Barrett JK et al (2012) Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: concepts and models for multi-arm studies. Res Synth Methods 3:98–110. doi:10.1002/jrsm.1044
19. White IR (2015) Network meta-analysis. Stat J 15:951–985
20. Salanti G, Higgins JP, Ades A, Ioannidis JP (2008) Evaluation of networks of randomized trials. Stat Methods Med Res 17:279–301. doi:10.1177/0962280207080643
21. Lu G, Ades AE (2004) Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med 23:3105–3124. doi:10.1002/sim.1875
22. Chaimani A, Higgins JPT, Mavridis D et al (2013) Graphical tools for network meta-analysis in STATA. PLoS One 8:e76654. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0076654
23. van Valkenhoef G, Lu G, de Brock B et al (2012) Automating network meta-analysis. Res Synth Methods 3:285–299. doi:10.1002/jrsm.1054
24. Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ et al (2013) Evidence synthesis for decision making 4: inconsistency in networks of evidence based on randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Making 33:641–656. doi:10.1177/0272989X12455847
25. White IR, Barrett JK, Jackson D, Higgins JPT (2012) Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: model estimation using multivariate meta-regression. Res Synth Methods 3:111–125. doi:10.1002/jrsm.1045
26. Song F, Xiong T, Parekh-Bhurke S et al (2011) Inconsistency between direct and indirect comparisons of competing interventions: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ Br Med J 343:d4909. doi:10.1136/bmj.d4909
27. Cipriani A, Barbui C, Salanti G et al (2011) Comparative efficacy and acceptability of antimanic drugs in acute mania: a multiple-treatments meta-analysis. Lancet 378:1306–1315. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60873-8
28. Salanti G, Ades A, Ioannidis JP (2011) Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial. J Clin Epidemiol 64:163–171. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.03.016
29. Medeiros FA (2014) Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints in glaucoma clinical trials. Br J Ophthalmol. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-305550
30. Rouse B, Cipriani A, Shi Q et al (2016) Network meta-analysis for clinical practice guidelines—a case study on first-line medical therapies for primary open-angle glaucoma. Ann Intern Med 164:674–682. doi:10.7326/M15-2367
31. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE et al (2008) GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 336:924–926. doi:10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD
32. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Montori V et al (2011) GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence—publication bias. J Clin Epidemiol 64:1277–1282. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.01.011
33. Salanti G, Del Giovane C, Chaimani A et al (2014) Evaluating the quality of evidence from a network meta-analysis. PLoS One. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0099682
34. Puhan MA, Schunemann HJ, Murad MH et al (2014) A GRADE Working Group approach for rating the quality of treatment effect estimates from network meta-analysis. BMJ Br Med J 349:g5630. doi:10.1136/bmj.g5630
35. Leucht S, Chaimani A, Cipriani AS et al (2016) Network meta-analyses should be the highest level of evidence in treatment guidelines. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. doi:10.1007/s00406-016-0715-4
36. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J et al (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement (Reprinted from Annals of Internal Medicine). PLoS Med 6:e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
37. Hutton B, Salanti G, Caldwell DM et al (2015) The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations. Ann Intern Med 162:777. doi:10.7326/M14-2385