ArticleStatistics in medicine2021
A Markov chain approach for ranking treatments in network meta-analysis.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative effects of different types of exercise on health-related quality of life during and after active cancer treatment: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Journal of sport and health science · 2023Pooled it
- A flexible multi-metric Bayesian framework for decision-making in Phase II multi-arm multi-stage studies.Statistics in medicine · 2024Trial
- NMAstudio 2.0: An interactive tool for network meta-analysis to enhance understanding, interpretation, and communication of the findings.Research synthesis methods · 2026Review
- Producing treatment hierarchies in network meta-analysis using probabilistic models and treatment-choice criteria.Research synthesis methods · 2026Article
- Perioperative immunotherapy strategies for resectable non-small cell lung cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Article
- Treatment recommendations based on network meta-analysis: Rules for risk-averse decision-makers.Research synthesis methods · 2025Article
- The complexity underlying treatment rankings: how to use them and what to look at.BMJ evidence-based medicine · 2023Article
- Choosing Intraocular Lenses in Patients Undergoing Bilateral Cataract Extraction-One Size Does Not Fit All.JAMA ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Answering complex hierarchy questions in network meta-analysis.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Article
- How robust are findings of pairwise and network meta-analysis in the presence of missing participant outcome data?BMC medicine · 2021Article
- A Markov chain approach for ranking treatments in network meta-analysis.Statistics in medicine · 2021Article
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
When interpreting the relative effects from a network meta-analysis (NMA), researchers are usually aware of the potential limitations that may render the results for some comparisons less useful or meaningless. In the presence of sufficient and appropriate data, some of these limitations (eg, risk of bias, small-study effects, publication bias) can be taken into account in the statistical analysis. Very often, though, the necessary data for applying these methods are missing and data limitations cannot be formally integrated into ranking. In addition, there are other important characteristics of the treatment comparisons that cannot be addressed within a statistical model but only through qualitative judgments; for example, the relevance of data to the research question, the plausibility of the assumptions, and so on. Here, we propose a new measure for treatment ranking called the Probability of Selecting a Treatment to Recommend (POST-R). We suggest that the order of treatments should represent the process of considering treatments for selection in clinical practice and we assign to each treatment a probability of being selected. This process can be considered as a Markov chain model that allows the end-users of NMA to select the most appropriate treatments based not only on the NMA results but also to information external to the NMA. In this way, we obtain rankings that can inform decision-making more efficiently as they represent not only the relative effects but also their potential limitations. We illustrate our approach using a NMA comparing treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis and we provide the Stata commands.
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.