Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32641105›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2020

Multivariate network meta-analysis incorporating class effects.

Rhiannon K Owen, Sylwia Bujkiewicz, Douglas G Tincello, Keith R Abrams

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Constructing Relative Effect Priors for Research Prioritization and Trial Design: A Meta-epidemiological Analysis.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rhiannon K OwenDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK. rko4@le.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-5977-376X
Sylwia BujkiewiczDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK.
Douglas G TincelloDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK.
Keith R AbramsDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK.
University of Leicester · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/L009854/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNetwork meta-analysis synthesises data from a number of clinical trials in order to assess the comparative efficacy of multiple healthcare interventions in similar patient populations. In situations where clinical trial data are heterogeneously reported i.e. data are missing for one or more outcomes of interest, synthesising such data can lead to disconnected networks of evidence, increased uncertainty, and potentially biased estimates which can have severe implications for decision-making. To overcome this issue, strength can be borrowed between outcomes of interest in multivariate network meta-analyses. Furthermore, in situations where there are relatively few trials informing each treatment comparison, there is a potential issue with the sparsity of data in the treatment networks, which can lead to substantial parameter uncertainty. A multivariate network meta-analysis approach can be further extended to borrow strength between interventions of the same class using hierarchical models.

methodsWe extend the trivariate network meta-analysis model to incorporate the exchangeability between treatment effects belonging to the same class of intervention to increase precision in treatment effect estimates. We further incorporate a missing data framework to estimate uncertainty in trials that did not report measures of variability in order to maximise the use of all available information for healthcare decision-making. The methods are applied to a motivating dataset in overactive bladder syndrome. The outcomes of interest were mean change from baseline in incontinence, voiding and urgency episodes. All models were fitted using Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods in WinBUGS.

resultsAll models (univariate, multivariate, and multivariate models incorporating class effects) produced similar point estimates for all treatment effects. Incorporating class effects in multivariate models often increased precision in treatment effect estimates.

conclusionsMultivariate network meta-analysis incorporating class effects allowed for the comparison of all interventions across all outcome measures to ameliorate the potential impact of outcome reporting bias, and further borrowed strength between interventions belonging to the same class of treatment to increase the precision in treatment effect estimates for healthcare policy and decision-making.

Indexed as

Network Meta-Analysis as TopicBayes TheoremHumansMarkov ChainsMonte Carlo MethodUncertaintyClass effectMeta-analysisMixed treatment comparisonsMultivariateNetwork meta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID32641105
PMCPMC7341581
OpenAlexW3041348763

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.