ArticleResearch synthesis methods2018
Graphs of study contributions and covariate distributions for network meta-regression.
Article in Research synthesis methods, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effects of different exercise types on craving in substance use disorder patients with drug dependence -network meta-analysis and dose-response relationships based on frequentist and Bayesian models.Addiction science & clinical practice · 2025Pooled it
- Arthroscopic procedures for degenerative rotator cuff disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Pooled it
- Perioperative Outcomes in Robotic, Laparoscopic, and Open Distal Pancreatectomy: A Network Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression.Cancers · 2025Article
- Methodologies for network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials in pain, anaesthesia, and perioperative medicine: a narrative review.British journal of anaesthesia · 2025Review
- Using individual participant data to improve network meta-analysis projects.BMJ evidence-based medicine · 2023Article
- A two-stage prediction model for heterogeneous effects of treatments.Statistics in medicine · 2021Article
- Bayesian network meta-regression hierarchical models using heavy-tailed multivariate random effects with covariate-dependent variances.Statistics in medicine · 2021Article
- Analgesic medicines for adults with low back pain: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2020Article
- Charting the landscape of graphical displays for meta-analysis and systematic reviews: a comprehensive review, taxonomy, and feature analysis.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Review
- Optimal doses of antidepressants in dependence on age: Combined covariate actions in Bayesian network meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2020Article
- Modelling time-course relationships with multiple treatments: Model-based network meta-analysis for continuous summary outcomes.Research synthesis methods · 2019Article
- Graphs of study contributions and covariate distributions for network meta-regression.Research synthesis methods · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMeta-regression results must be interpreted taking into account the range of covariate values of the contributing studies. Results based on interpolation or extrapolation may be unreliable. In network meta-regression (NMR) models, which include covariates in network meta-analyses, results are estimated using direct and indirect evidence; therefore, it may be unclear which studies and covariate values contribute to which result. We propose graphs to help understand which trials and covariate values contribute to each NMR result and to highlight extrapolation or interpolation.
methodsWe introduce methods to calculate the contribution that each trial and covariate value makes to each result and compare them with existing methods. We show how to construct graphs including a network covariate distribution diagram, covariate-contribution plot, heat plot, contribution-NMR plot, and heat-NMR plot. We demonstrate the methods using a dataset with treatments for malaria using the covariate average age and a dataset of topical fluoride interventions for preventing dental caries using the covariate randomisation year.
resultsFor the malaria dataset, no contributing trials had an average age between 7-25 years and therefore results were interpolated within this range. For the fluoride dataset, there are no contributing trials randomised between 1954-1959 for most comparisons therefore, within this range, results would be extrapolated.
conclusionsEven in a fully connected network, an NMR result may be estimated from trials with a narrower covariate range than the range of the whole dataset. Calculating contributions and graphically displaying them aids interpretation of NMR result by highlighting extrapolated or interpolated results.
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.