Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38637311›Full record

ArticleBiometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift2024

Sharing information across patient subgroups to draw conclusions from sparse treatment networks.

Theodoros Evrenoglou, Silvia Metelli, Johannes-Schneider Thomas, Spyridon Siafis, Rebecca M Turner, Stefan Leucht, Anna Chaimani

Abstract readNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Article in Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. 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

7 authors.

Theodoros EvrenoglouCenter of Research in Epidemiology and Statistics (CRESS-U1153), Université Paris Cité, INSERM, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0003-3336-8058
Silvia MetelliCenter of Research in Epidemiology and Statistics (CRESS-U1153), Université Paris Cité, INSERM, Paris, France.
Johannes-Schneider ThomasDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munchen, Germany.
Spyridon SiafisDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munchen, Germany.
Rebecca M TurnerMRC Clinical Trials Unit, University College London, London, UK.
Stefan LeuchtDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munchen, Germany.
Anna ChaimaniCenter of Research in Epidemiology and Statistics (CRESS-U1153), Université Paris Cité, INSERM, Paris, France.

Funding

French National Research Agency ANR-22-CE36-0013-01Medical Research Council MC_UU_00004/06UK Medical Research Council MC_UU_00004/06
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Network meta-analysis (NMA) usually provides estimates of the relative effects with the highest possible precision. However, sparse networks with few available studies and limited direct evidence can arise, threatening the robustness and reliability of NMA estimates. In these cases, the limited amount of available information can hamper the formal evaluation of the underlying NMA assumptions of transitivity and consistency. In addition, NMA estimates from sparse networks are expected to be imprecise and possibly biased as they rely on large-sample approximations that are invalid in the absence of sufficient data. We propose a Bayesian framework that allows sharing of information between two networks that pertain to different population subgroups. Specifically, we use the results from a subgroup with a lot of direct evidence (a dense network) to construct informative priors for the relative effects in the target subgroup (a sparse network). This is a two-stage approach where at the first stage, we extrapolate the results of the dense network to those expected from the sparse network. This takes place by using a modified hierarchical NMA model where we add a location parameter that shifts the distribution of the relative effects to make them applicable to the target population. At the second stage, these extrapolated results are used as prior information for the sparse network. We illustrate our approach through a motivating example of psychiatric patients. Our approach results in more precise and robust estimates of the relative effects and can adequately inform clinical practice in presence of sparse networks.

Indexed as

Bayes TheoremHumansMeta-Analysis as TopicReproducibility of Resultsinformative priorsmixed treatment comparisonssharing informationsparse data

Identifiers

PMID38637311
PMCPMC7617248

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.