Corrigendum to “Advances in the GRADE approach to rate the certainty in estimates from a network meta-analysis” [J Clin Epidemiol 2018;93:36-44](S0895435617310752)(10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.10.005);Advances in the GRADE approach to rate the certainty in estimates from a network meta-analysis

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 93, Issue , 2018, Pages 36-44

  Brignardello Petersen, Romina ^a,b   Bonner, Ashley ^a   Alexander, Paul E ^a,c   Siemieniuk, Reed A ^a,d   Furukawa, Toshi A ^e   Rochwerg, Bram ^a   Hazlewood, Glen S ^f   Alhazzani, Waleed ^a   Mustafa, Reem A ^a,g   Murad, M Hassan ^h   Puhan, Milo A ^i,j   Schünemann, Holger J ^a   Guyatt, Gordon H ^a  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CHILE   (Chile)

^c Infectious Diseases Society of America Emerging Infections Network   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^e KYOTO UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

^f UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^g UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^h MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

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

more..

Author keywords

Certainty of evidence; Confidence in estimates of effect; GRADE; Indirect comparisons; Network meta analysis; Quality of evidence

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUTHOR; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; DECISION MAKING; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; EVALUATION STUDY; GRADING OF RECOMMENDATIONS ASSESSMENT DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION; HUMAN; NETWORK META-ANALYSIS; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); THEORETICAL MODEL;

GRADE APPROACH; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; NETWORK META-ANALYSIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS AS TOPIC;

EID: 85040227186     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.04.013     Document Type: Erratum

References (16)

1. Puhan, M.A., Schunemann, H.J., Murad, M.H., Li, T., Brignardello-Petersen, R., Singh, J.A., et al. A GRADE Working Group approach for rating the quality of treatment effect estimates from network meta-analysis. BMJ, 349, 2014, g5630.
2. Balshem, H., Helfand, M., Schunemann, H.J., Oxman, A.D., Kunz, R., Brozek, J., et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 64 (2011), 401–406.
3. Greco, T., Biondi-Zoccai, G., Saleh, O., Pasin, L., Cabrini, L., Zangrillo, A., et al. The attractiveness of network meta-analysis: a comprehensive systematic and narrative review. Heart Lung Vessel 7:2 (2015), 133–142.
4. Rochwerg, B., Alhazzani, W., Sindi, A., Heels-Ansdell, D., Thabane, L., Fox-Robichaud, A., et al. Fluid resuscitation in sepsis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 161 (2014), 347–355.
5. Rochwerg, B., Neupane, B., Zhang, Y., Garcia, C.C., Raghu, G., Richeldi, L., et al. Treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a network meta-analysis. BMC Med, 14, 2016, 18.
6. Sekercioglu, N., Angeliki Veroniki, A., Thabane, L., Busse, J.W., Akhtar-Danesh, N., Iorio, A., et al. Effects of different phosphate lowering strategies in patients with CKD on laboratory outcomes: a systematic review and NMA. PLoS One, 12(3), 2017, e0171028.
7. Sekercioglu, N., Thabane, L., Diaz Martinez, J.P., Nesrallah, G., Longo, C.J., Busse, J.W., et al. Comparative effectiveness of phosphate Binders in patients with Chronic Kidney Disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. PLoS One, 11(6), 2016, e0156891.
8. Rochwerg, B., Alhazzani, W., Gibson, A., Ribic, C.M., Sindi, A., Heels-Ansdell, D., et al. Fluid type and the use of renal replacement therapy in sepsis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med 41:9 (2015), 1561–1571.
9. Guyatt, G.H., Oxman, A.D., Kunz, R., Brozek, J., Alonso-Coello, P., Rind, D., et al. GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence–imprecision. J Clin Epidemiol 64 (2011), 1283–1293.
10. Murad, M.H., Drake, M.T., Mullan, R.J., Mauck, K.F., Stuart, L.M., Lane, M.A., et al. Clinical review. Comparative effectiveness of drug treatments to prevent fragility fractures: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 97 (2012), 1871–1880.
11. Krahn, U., Binder, H., Konig, J., A graphical tool for locating inconsistency in network meta-analyses. BMC Med Res Methodol, 13, 2013, 35.
12. Efthimiou, O., Debray, T.P., van Valkenhoef, G., Trelle, S., Panayidou, K., Moons, K.G., et al. GetReal in network meta-analysis: a review of the methodology. Res Synth Methods 7:3 (2016), 236–263.
13. Song, F., Clark, A., Bachmann, M.O., Maas, J., Simulation evaluation of statistical properties of methods for indirect and mixed treatment comparisons. BMC Med Res Methodol, 12, 2012, 138.
14. Veroniki, A.A., Mavridis, D., Higgins, J.P., Salanti, G., Characteristics of a loop of evidence that affect detection and estimation of inconsistency: a simulation study. BMC Med Res Methodol, 14, 2014, 106.
15. Veroniki, A.A., Vasiliadis, H.S., Higgins, J.P., Salanti, G., Evaluation of inconsistency in networks of interventions. Int J Epidemiol 42 (2013), 332–345.
16. Cipriani, A., Furukawa, T.A., Salanti, G., Geddes, J.R., Higgins, J.P., Churchill, R., et al. Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 12 new-generation antidepressants: a multiple-treatments meta-analysis. Lancet 373 (2009), 746–758.