ArticleStatistical methods in medical research2018
Continuously updated network meta-analysis and statistical monitoring for timely decision-making.
Article in Statistical methods in medical research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Resuscitation fluid types in sepsis, surgical, and trauma patients: a systematic review and sequential network meta-analyses.Critical care (London, England) · 2020Pooled it
- Preventive Treatments for Psychosis: Umbrella Review (Just the Evidence).Frontiers in psychiatry · 2019Pooled it
- Determining the Conclusiveness of Systematic Review Evidence : A Scoping Review of Methodological Approaches.Annals of internal medicine · 2026Article
- Critical Analysis of Reporting Quality of Network Meta-Analyses in Periodontology and Implantology.European journal of dentistry · 2025Article
- A living critical interpretive synthesis to yield a framework on the production and dissemination of living evidence syntheses for decision-making.Implementation science : IS · 2024Review
- Impact of SGLT2 inhibitors on patient outcomes: a network meta-analysis.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2023 · on this mapArticle
- How to update a living systematic review and keep it alive during a pandemic: a practical guide.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- When we shouldn't borrow information from an existing network of trials for planning a new trial.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Feasibility study for interactive reporting of network meta-analysis: experiences from the development of the MetaInsight COVID-19 app for stakeholder exploration, re-analysis and sensitivity analysis from living systematic reviews.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Article
- Living Systematic Reviews.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Estimating the sample size of sham-controlled randomized controlled trials using existing evidence.F1000Research · 2022Article
- Article
- A framework for prospective, adaptive meta-analysis (FAME) of aggregate data from randomised trials.PLoS medicine · 2021Article
- Effects of nutrition intervention strategies in the primary prevention of overweight and obesity in school settings: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2021Article
- Severe COVID-19 Infection Associated with Endothelial Dysfunction Induces Multiple Organ Dysfunction: A Review of Therapeutic Interventions.Biomedicines · 2021Review
- A Markov chain approach for ranking treatments in network meta-analysis.Statistics in medicine · 2021Article
- Visualizing the evolution of evidence: Cumulative network meta-analyses of new generation antidepressants in the last 40 years.Research synthesis methods · 2021Article
- Perspective: Network Meta-analysis Reaches Nutrition Research: Current Status, Scientific Concepts, and Future Directions.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2019Article
- Synthesizing existing evidence to design future trials: survey of methodologists from European institutions.Trials · 2019Article
- Hypothesis testing in Bayesian network meta-analysis.BMC medical research methodology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) are traditionally used retrospectively to assess existing evidence. However, the current evidence often undergoes several updates as new studies become available. In each update recommendations about the conclusiveness of the evidence and the need of future studies need to be made. In the context of prospective meta-analysis future studies are planned as part of the accumulation of the evidence. In this setting, multiple testing issues need to be taken into account when the meta-analysis results are interpreted. We extend ideas of sequential monitoring of meta-analysis to provide a methodological framework for updating NMAs. Based on the z-score for each network estimate (the ratio of effect size to its standard error) and the respective information gained after each study enters NMA we construct efficacy and futility stopping boundaries. A NMA treatment effect is considered conclusive when it crosses an appended stopping boundary. The methods are illustrated using a recently published NMA where we show that evidence about a particular comparison can become conclusive via indirect evidence even if no further trials address this comparison.
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.