Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37131978›Full record

ArticleCampbell systematic reviews2020

CINeMA: Software for semiautomated assessment of the confidence in the results of network meta-analysis.

Theodoros Papakonstantinou, Adriani Nikolakopoulou, Julian P T Higgins, Matthias Egger, Georgia Salanti

Open access · diamondAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Campbell systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 365 papers, 118 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
365citing papers in PubMed, 118 pooled it
35.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

365 citing papers in PubMed, 118 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 516 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

305 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Theodoros PapakonstantinouInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine University of Bern Bern Switzerland.
Adriani NikolakopoulouInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine University of Bern Bern Switzerland.
Julian P T HigginsPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School University of Bristol Bristol UK.
Matthias EggerInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine University of Bern Bern Switzerland.
Georgia SalantiInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine University of Bern Bern Switzerland.
University of Bern · CHUniversity of Bristol · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Network meta-analysis (NMA) compares several interventions that are linked in a network of comparative studies and estimates the relative treatment effects between all treatments, using both direct and indirect evidence. NMA is increasingly used for decision making in health care, however, a user-friendly system to evaluate the confidence that can be placed in the results of NMA is currently lacking. This paper is a tutorial describing the Confidence In Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) web application, which is based on the framework developed by Salanti et al (2014,

Identifiers

PMID37131978
PMCPMC8356302
OpenAlexW3011743134

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.