Three-dimensional evidence network plot system: covariate imbalances and effects in network meta-analysis explored using a new software tool

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 86, Issue , 2017, Pages 182-195

  Batson, Sarah ^a   Score, Robert ^a   Sutton, Alex J ^b  

^a Decision Resources Group   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Covariate; Evidence networks; Heterogeneity; Meta analysis feasibility; Network meta analysis; Novel graphical tool; Three dimensional

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; DATA ANALYSIS; DATA ANALYSIS SOFTWARE; DISEASE DURATION; HUMAN; NETWORK META-ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REFERENCE VALUE; RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS; THREE DIMENSIONAL EVIDENCE NETWORK PLOT SYSTEM; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; VALIDITY; VISCERAL METASTASIS; COMPUTER GRAPHICS; SOFTWARE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

COMPUTER GRAPHICS; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HUMANS; NETWORK META-ANALYSIS; SOFTWARE;

EID: 85017433891     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.03.008     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Bafeta, A., Trinquart, L., Seror, R., Ravaud, P., Analysis of the systematic reviews process in reports of network meta-analyses: methodological systematic review. BMJ, 347, 2013, f3675.
2. Dias, S., Welton, N.J., Sutton, A.J., Ades, A.E., Evidence synthesis for decision making 1: introduction. Med Decis Making 33 (2013), 597–606.
3. Dias, S., Sutton, A.J., Ades, A.E., Welton, N.J., Evidence synthesis for decision making 2: a generalized linear modeling framework for pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Making 33 (2013), 607–617.
4. Hutton, B., Salanti, G., Caldwell, D.M., Chaimani, A., Schmid, C.H., Cameron, C., et al. The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations. Ann Intern Med 162 (2015), 777–784.
5. Chaimani, A., Higgins, J.P., Mavridis, D., Spyridonos, P., Salanti, G., Graphical tools for network meta-analysis in STATA. PLoS One, 8, 2013, e76654.
6. Jansen, J.P., Fleurence, R., Devine, B., Itzler, R., Barrett, A., Hawkins, N., 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 14:4 (2011), 417–428.
7. Cooper, N.J., Sutton, A.J., Morris, D., Ades, A.E., Welton, N.J., Addressing between-study heterogeneity and inconsistency in mixed treatment comparisons: application to stroke prevention treatments in individuals with non-rheumatic atrial fibrillation. Stat Med 28 (2009), 1861–1881.
8. Dias, S., Sutton, A.J., Welton, N.J., Ades, A.E., Evidence synthesis for decision making 3: heterogeneity–subgroups, meta-regression, bias, and bias-adjustment. Med Decis Making 33 (2013), 618–640.
9. Ades, A.E., Lu, G., Higgins, J.P., The interpretation of random-effects meta-analysis in decision models. Med Decis Making 25 (2005), 646–654.
10. Sutton, A.J., Cooper, N.J., Jones, D.R., Lambert, P.C., Thompson, J.R., Abrams, K.R., Evidence-based sample size calculations based upon updated meta-analysis. Stat Med 26 (2007), 2479–2500.
11. Welton, N., Ades, A.E., Research decisions in the face of heterogeneity: what can a new study tell us?. Health Econ 21 (2012), 1196–1200.
12. Riley, R.D., Lambert, P.C., Abo-Zaid, G., Meta-analysis of individual participant data: rationale, conduct, and reporting. BMJ, 340, 2010, c221.
13. Thompson, S.G., Higgins, J.P., How should meta-regression analyses be undertaken and interpreted?. Stat Med 21 (2002), 1559–1573.
14. Cope, S., Zhang, J., Saletan, S., Smiechowski, B., Jansen, J.P., Schmid, P., A process for assessing the feasibility of a network meta-analysis: a case study of everolimus in combination with hormonal therapy versus chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer. BMC Med, 12, 2014, 93.
15. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Certolizumab pegol for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. NICE technology appraisal guidance, 2010, TA186.
16. Nixon, R.M., Bansback, N., Brennan, A., Using mixed treatment comparisons and meta-regression to perform indirect comparisons to estimate the efficacy of biologic treatments in rheumatoid arthritis. Stat Med 26 (2007), 1237–1254.
17. Donegan, S., Dias, S., Tudur Smith, C., Marinho, V., Welton, N., Graphs of study contributions and covariate distributions for network meta-regression. Res Synth Methods, 2017.
18. Harboard, R.M., Higgins, J.P., Meta–regression in Stata. Stata J 8:4 (2008), 493–519.
19. Ibrahimi, P., Jashari, F., Bajraktari, G., Wester, P., Henein, M.Y., Ultrasound assessment of carotid plaque echogenicity response to statin therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Mol Sci 16:5 (2015), 10734–10747.
20. Rucker, G., Schwarzer, G., Automated drawing of network plots in network meta-analysis. Res Synth Methods 7:1 (2016), 94–107.
21. Ware C, Franck G, editors. Viewing a graph in a virtual reality display is three times as good as a 2D diagram. IEEE Conference on Visual Languages; 1994 4–7 Oct 1994: IEEE.
22. Grossman, T., Chevalier, F., Kazi, R.H., Bringing research articles to life with animated figures. Interactions 23:4 (2016), 52–57.