Assessing Key Assumptions of Network Meta-Analysis: A Review of Methods

Autor/inn/en	Donegan, Sarah; Williamson, Paula; D'Alessandro, Umberto; Tudur Smith, Catrin
Titel	Assessing Key Assumptions of Network Meta-Analysis: A Review of Methods
Quelle	In: Research Synthesis Methods, 4 (2013) 4, S.291-323 (33 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1759-2879
DOI	10.1002/jrsm.1085
Schlagwörter	Networks; Meta Analysis; Research Methodology; Diseases; Drug Therapy; Hypothesis Testing; Measurement; Scaling; Heterogeneous Grouping; Models; Reliability; Literature Reviews + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Meta-analysis; Metaanalyse; Research method; Forschungsmethode; Disease; Krankheit; Hypothesenprüfung; Hypothesentest; Messverfahren; Scale construction; Skalenkonstruktion; Analogiemodell; Reliabilität
Abstract	Background: Homogeneity and consistency assumptions underlie network meta-analysis (NMA). Methods exist to assess the assumptions but they are rarely and poorly applied. We review and illustrate methods to assess homogeneity and consistency. Methods: Eligible articles focussed on indirect comparison or NMA methodology. Articles were sought by hand-searching and scanning references (March 2013). Assumption assessment methods described in the articles were reviewed, and applied to compare anti-malarial drugs. Results: 116 articles were included. Methods to assess homogeneity were: comparing characteristics across trials; comparing trial-specific treatment effects; using hypothesis tests or statistical measures; applying fixed-effect and random-effects pair-wise meta-analysis; and investigating treatment effect-modifiers. Methods to assess consistency were: comparing characteristics; investigating treatment effect-modifiers; comparing outcome measurements in the referent group; node-splitting; inconsistency modelling; hypothesis tests; back transformation; multidimensional scaling; a two-stage approach; and a graph-theoretical method. Conclusions: Presently, we advocate applying existing assessment methods collectively to gain the best understanding possible regarding whether assumptions are reasonable. In our example, consistency was questionable; therefore the NMA results may be unreliable. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Wiley-Blackwell. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8598; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01