ArticleStatistics in medicine2019
Incorporating external evidence on between-trial heterogeneity in network meta-analysis.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Natalizumab and Tyruko (natalizumab biosimilar) for treating highly active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis after at least one disease-modifying therapy: a systematic review and economic model.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2026Pooled it
- Crizanlizumab and comparators for adults with sickle cell disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2020Pooled it
- Effects of resistance training on the glycemic control of people with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Archives of endocrinology and metabolismPooled it
- Article
- An investigation of the impact of using contrast- and arm-synthesis models for network meta-analysis.Research synthesis methods · 2025Article
- One-step parametric network meta-analysis models using the exact likelihood that allow for time-varying treatment effects.Research synthesis methods · 2025Article
- Risk of Bias in Network Meta-Analysis (RoB NMA) tool.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- Assessing the comparative effects of interventions in COPD: a tutorial on network meta-analysis for clinicians.Respiratory research · 2024Review
- The optimal second-line therapy for older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis using individual participant data (IPD).Systematic reviews · 2024Article
- Sharing information across patient subgroups to draw conclusions from sparse treatment networks.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2024Article
- A new approach to evaluating loop inconsistency in network meta-analysis.Statistics in medicine · 2023Article
- Challenges of modelling approaches for network meta-analysis of time-to-event outcomes in the presence of non-proportional hazards to aid decision making: Application to a melanoma network.Statistical methods in medical research · 2022Article
- Network Meta-Analysis Techniques for Synthesizing Prevention Science Evidence.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2022Review
- A likelihood ratio test for the homogeneity of between-study variance in network meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2021Article
- BRIDGING RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AND SINGLE-ARM TRIALS USING COMMENSURATE PRIORS IN ARM-BASED NETWORK META-ANALYSIS.The annals of applied statistics · 2021Article
- A method for assessing robustness of the results of a star-shaped network meta-analysis under the unidentifiable consistency assumption.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Article
- The impact of covariance priors on arm-based Bayesian network meta-analyses with binary outcomes.Statistics in medicine · 2020Article
- How to Conduct a Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2020Article
- The dark side of the force: Multiplicity issues in network meta-analysis and how to address them.Research synthesis methods · 2020Article
- Incorporating external evidence on between-trial heterogeneity in network meta-analysis.Statistics in medicine · 2019Article
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
In a network meta-analysis, between-study heterogeneity variances are often very imprecisely estimated because data are sparse, so standard errors of treatment differences can be highly unstable. External evidence can provide informative prior distributions for heterogeneity and, hence, improve inferences. We explore approaches for specifying informative priors for multiple heterogeneity variances in a network meta-analysis. First, we assume equal heterogeneity variances across all pairwise intervention comparisons (approach 1); incorporating an informative prior for the common variance is then straightforward. Models allowing unequal heterogeneity variances are more realistic; however, care must be taken to ensure implied variance-covariance matrices remain valid. We consider three strategies for specifying informative priors for multiple unequal heterogeneity variances. Initially, we choose different informative priors according to intervention comparison type and assume heterogeneity to be proportional across comparison types and equal within comparison type (approach 2). Next, we allow all heterogeneity variances in the network to differ, while specifying a common informative prior for each. We explore two different approaches to this: placing priors on variances and correlations separately (approach 3) or using an informative inverse Wishart distribution (approach 4). Our methods are exemplified through application to two network metaanalyses. Appropriate informative priors are obtained from previously published evidence-based distributions for heterogeneity. Relevant prior information on between-study heterogeneity can be incorporated into network meta-analyses, without needing to assume equal heterogeneity across treatment comparisons. The approaches proposed will be beneficial in sparse data sets and provide more appropriate intervals for treatment differences than those based on imprecise heterogeneity estimates.
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.