ReviewWorld journal of methodology2022
Network meta-analyses: Methodological prerequisites and clinical usefulness.
Review in World journal of methodology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 6 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Relative effectiveness of different resistance training modalities on lower-body strength and explosive power: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative effects of exercise-based interventions on jump, linear sprint, and change-of-direction performance in female adolescent team-sport athletes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review identifying effective teaching methods and their combinations for increasing empathy in physicians: pairwise and network meta-analysis.BMC medical education · 2025Pooled it
- Hypoglycemic activity ofFrontiers in pharmacology · 2024Pooled it
- Beyond the Umbrella: A Systematic Review of the Interventions for the Prevention of and Reduction in the Incidence and Severity of Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome in Patients Who Undergo In Vitro Fertilization Treatments.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Pooled it
- Interventions to prevent or reduce the incidence and severity of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: a systematic umbrella review of the best clinical evidence.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2023Pooled it
- Article
- A Systematic Review of Controlled Trials: Can Patient Adherence to Antibiotics Be Improved Through Pharmaceutical Communication-Based Interventions?Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It is an undeniable fact that systematic reviews play a crucial role in informing clinical practice; however, conventional head-to-head meta-analyses do have limitations. In particular, studies can only be compared in a pair-wise fashion, and conclusions can only be drawn in the light of direct evidence. In contrast, network meta-analyses can not only compare multiple interventions but also utilize indirect evidence which increases their precision. On top of that, they can also rank competing interventions. In this mini-review, we have aimed to elaborate on the principles and techniques governing network meta-analyses to achieve a methodologically sound synthesis, thus enabling safe conclusions to be drawn in clinical practice. We have emphasized the prerequisites of a well-conducted Network Meta-Analysis (NMA), the value of selecting appropriate outcomes according to guidelines for transparent reporting, and the clarity achieved
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.