ArticleStatistics in medicine2019
Participants' outcomes gone missing within a network of interventions: Bayesian modeling strategies.
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 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Informative missingness: What can we learn from patterns in missing laboratory data in the electronic health record?Journal of biomedical informatics · 2023Article
- Continuous(ly) missing outcome data in network meta-analysis: A one-stage pattern-mixture model approach.Statistical methods in medical research · 2021Article
- Pattern-mixture model in network meta-analysis of binary missing outcome data: one-stage or two-stage approach?BMC medical research methodology · 2021Article
- Comparison of exclusion, imputation and modelling of missing binary outcome data in frequentist network meta-analysis.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Article
- Participants' outcomes gone missing within a network of interventions: Bayesian modeling strategies.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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the implications of addressing informative missing binary outcome data (MOD) on network meta-analysis (NMA) estimates while applying the missing at random (MAR) assumption under different prior structures of the missingness parameter.
methodsIn three motivating examples, we compared six different prior structures of the informative missingness odds ratio (IMOR) parameter in logarithmic scale under pattern-mixture and selection models. Then, we simulated 1000 triangle networks of two-arm trials assuming informative MOD related to interventions. We extended the Bayesian random-effects NMA model for binary outcomes and node-splitting approach to incorporate these 12 models in total. With interval plots, we illustrated the posterior distribution of log OR, common between-trial variance (τ
resultsAll models gave similar point estimates for all NMA estimates regardless of simulation scenario. For moderate and large MOD, intervention-specific prior structure of log IMOR led to larger posterior standard deviation of log ORs compared to trial-specific and common-within-network prior structures. Hierarchical prior structure led to slightly more precise τ
conclusionsAnalyzing informative MOD assuming MAR with different prior structures of log IMOR affected mainly the precision of NMA estimates. Reviewers should decide in advance on the prior structure of log IMOR that best aligns with the condition and interventions investigated.
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.