ArticlePloS one2014
Characteristics of networks of interventions: a description of a database of 186 published networks.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
56 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Ultra-Long-Acting, Long-Acting, Intermediate-Acting, and Biosimilar Insulins for Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: a Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Producing treatment hierarchies in network meta-analysis using probabilistic models and treatment-choice criteria.Research synthesis methods · 2026Article
- Tipping point analysis in network meta-analysis.Research synthesis methods · 2025Article
- An investigation of the impact of using contrast- and arm-synthesis models for network meta-analysis.Research synthesis methods · 2025Article
- Real-world evidence on the association of novel antidiabetic medication use with cancer risk and protective effects: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2025Article
- Does type of funding affect reporting in network meta-analysis? A scoping review of network meta-analyses.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- PALM: PATIENT-CENTERED TREATMENT RANKING VIA LARGE-SCALE MULTIVARIATE NETWORK META-ANALYSIS.The annals of applied statistics · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the Reporting Standard Guidelines of Network Meta-Analyses in Physical Therapy: A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- The development of network meta-analysis.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2022Article
- A Revised Framework to Evaluate the Consistency Assumption Globally in a Network of Interventions.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022Article
- Network Meta-Analysis Techniques for Synthesizing Prevention Science Evidence.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2022Review
- BRIDGING RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AND SINGLE-ARM TRIALS USING COMMENSURATE PRIORS IN ARM-BASED NETWORK META-ANALYSIS.The annals of applied statistics · 2021Article
- Predictive P-score for treatment ranking in Bayesian network meta-analysis.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Article
- Evidence inconsistency degrees of freedom in Bayesian network meta-analysis.Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics · 2021Article
- Continuous(ly) missing outcome data in network meta-analysis: A one-stage pattern-mixture model approach.Statistical methods in medical research · 2021Article
- Prior Choices of Between-Study Heterogeneity in Contemporary Bayesian Network Meta-analyses: an Empirical Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Article
- When does the use of individual patient data in network meta-analysis make a difference? A simulation study.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Article
- Pattern-mixture model in network meta-analysis of binary missing outcome data: one-stage or two-stage approach?BMC medical research methodology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Systematic reviews that employ network meta-analysis are undertaken and published with increasing frequency while related statistical methodology is evolving. Future statistical developments and evaluation of the existing methodologies could be motivated by the characteristics of the networks of interventions published so far in order to tackle real rather than theoretical problems. Based on the recently formed network meta-analysis literature we aim to provide an insight into the characteristics of networks in healthcare research. We searched PubMed until end of 2012 for meta-analyses that used any form of indirect comparison. We collected data from networks that compared at least four treatments regarding their structural characteristics as well as characteristics of their analysis. We then conducted a descriptive analysis of the various network characteristics. We included 186 networks of which 35 (19%) were star-shaped (treatments were compared to a common comparator but not between themselves). The median number of studies per network was 21 and the median number of treatments compared was 6. The majority (85%) of the non-star shaped networks included at least one multi-arm study. Synthesis of data was primarily done via network meta-analysis fitted within a Bayesian framework (113 (61%) networks). We were unable to identify the exact method used to perform indirect comparison in a sizeable number of networks (18 (9%)). In 32% of the networks the investigators employed appropriate statistical methods to evaluate the consistency assumption; this percentage is larger among recently published articles. Our descriptive analysis provides useful information about the characteristics of networks of interventions published the last 16 years and the methods for their analysis. Although the validity of network meta-analysis results highly depends on some basic assumptions, most authors did not report and evaluate them adequately. Reviewers and editors need to be aware of these assumptions and insist on their reporting and accuracy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.