GRADE approach to rate the certainty from a network meta-analysis: avoiding spurious judgments of imprecision in sparse networks

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 105, Issue , 2019, Pages 60-67

  Brignardello Petersen, Romina ^a   Murad, M Hassan ^b   Walter, Stephen D ^a   McLeod, Shelley ^a,c   Carrasco Labra, Alonso ^a,d   Rochwerg, Bram ^a   Schünemann, Holger J ^a   Tomlinson, George ^c,e   Guyatt, Gordon H ^a  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^c MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CHILE   (Chile)

^e UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

certainty; clinical practice guidelines; evidence based medicine; GRADE; imprecision; meta analysis; Network meta analysis; quality of evidence

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; FEASIBILITY STUDY; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS; NETWORK META-ANALYSIS; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; BAYES THEOREM; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCIBILITY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

BAYES THEOREM; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; GRADE APPROACH; HUMANS; NETWORK META-ANALYSIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 85054793352     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.08.022     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Zarin, W., Veroniki, A.A., Nincic, V., Vafaei, A., Reynen, E., Motiwala, S.S., et al. Characteristics and knowledge synthesis approach for 456 network meta-analyses: a scoping review. BMC Med, 15, 2017, 3.
2. Efthimiou, O., Mavridis, D., Cipriani, A., Leucht, S., Bagos, P., Salanti, G., An approach for modelling multiple correlated outcomes in a network of interventions using odds ratios. Stat Med 33 (2014), 2275–2287.
3. 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 (2011), 417–428.
4. Mills, E.J., Thorlund, K., Ioannidis, J.P., Demystifying trial networks and network meta-analysis. BMJ, 346, 2013, f2914.
5. 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. Res Synth Methods 3 (2012), 80–97.
6. McLeod, S.L., Brignardello-Petersen, R., Worster, A., You, J., Iansavichene, A., Guyatt, G., et al. Comparative effectiveness of antiarrhythmics for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Resuscitation 121 (2017), 90–97.
7. Higgins, J.P., Whitehead, A., Borrowing strength from external trials in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 15 (1996), 2733–2749.
8. Lumley, T., Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Stat Med 21 (2002), 2313–2324.
9. Turner, R.M., Davey, J., Clarke, M.J., Thompson, S.G., Higgins, J.P., Predicting the extent of heterogeneity in meta-analysis, using empirical data from the Cochrane database of systematic reviews. Int J Epidemiol 41 (2012), 818–827.
10. Neupane, B., Richer, D., Bonner, A.J., Kibret, T., Beyene, J., Network meta-analysis using R: a review of currently available automated packages. PLoS One, 9, 2014, e115065.
11. Brignardello-Petersen, R., Bonner, A., Alexander, P.E., Siemieniuk, R.A., Furukawa, T.A., Rochwerg, B., et al. Advances in the GRADE approach to rate the certainty in estimates from a network meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 93 (2018), 36–44.
12. 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.
13. Thorlund, K., Thabane, L., Mills, E.J., Modelling heterogeneity variances in multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis–are informative priors the better solution?. BMC Med Res Methodol, 13, 2013, 2.
14. Petropoulou, M., Nikolakopoulou, A., Veroniki, A.A., Rios, P., Vafaei, A., Zarin, W., et al. Bibliographic study showed improving statistical methodology of network meta-analyses published between 1999 and 2015. J Clin Epidemiol 82 (2017), 20–28.
15. Song, F., Xiong, T., Parekh-Bhurke, S., Loke, Y.K., Sutton, A.J., Eastwood, A.J., et al. Inconsistency between direct and indirect comparisons of competing interventions: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ, 343, 2011, d4909.
16. Deeks, J., Higgins, J., Chapter 9: analysing data and undertakink meta-analyses. JPT, H., Green, S., (eds.) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011], 2011, The Cochrane Collaboration Available from http://handbook.cochrane.org.
17. Jansen, J.P., Crawford, B., Bergman, G., Stam, W., Bayesian meta-analysis of multiple treatment comparisons: an introduction to mixed treatment comparisons. Value Health 11 (2008), 956–964.
18. Hoaglin, D.C., Hawkins, N., Jansen, J.P., Scott, D.A., Itzler, R., Cappelleri, J.C., et al. Conducting indirect-treatment-comparison and network-meta-analysis studies: report of the ISPor task force on indirect treatment comparisons good research practices: part 2. Value Health 14 (2011), 429–437.
19. Hong, H., Carlin, B.P., Shamliyan, T.A., Wyman, J.F., Ramakrishnan, R., Sainfort, F., et al. Comparing Bayesian and frequentist approaches for multiple outcome mixed treatment comparisons. Med Decis Making 33 (2013), 702–714.
20. Many reviews are systematic but some are more transparent and completely reported than others. PLoS Med, 4, 2007, e147.
21. Booth, A., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Moher, D., Petticrew, M., Stewart, L., An international registry of systematic-review protocols. Lancet 377 (2011), 108–109.
22. Silagy, C.A., Middleton, P., Hopewell, S., Publishing protocols of systematic reviews: comparing what was done to what was planned. JAMA 287 (2002), 2831–2834.
23. Kirkham, J.J., Altman, D.G., Williamson, P.R., Bias due to changes in specified outcomes during the systematic review process. PLoS One, 5, 2010, e9810.
24. van Valkenhoef, G., Lu, G., de Brock, B., Hillege, H., Ades, A.E., Welton, N.J., Automating network meta-analysis. Res Synth Methods 3 (2012), 285–299.
25. R Core Team. R. A language and environment for statistical computing. 2016, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
26. Rücker, G., Schwarzer, G., Krahn, U., König, J., Netmeta: network meta-analysis using frequentist methods. R Package version 0.9-6, 2017 https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=netmeta.
27. Urquhart, O., Tampi, M.P., Pilcher, L., Slayton, R., Araujo, M.B., Espinoza, L., et al. Nonrestorative treatments for caries: systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Dent Res, 5, 2018 22034518800014.
28. 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.