Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39103781›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2024

crossnma: An R package to synthesize cross-design evidence and cross-format data using network meta-analysis and network meta-regression.

Tasnim Hamza, Guido Schwarzer, Georgia Salanti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors.

Tasnim HamzaInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. tasnim.hamza@unibe.ch.
Guido SchwarzerInstitute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Faculty of Medicine and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Georgia SalantiInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough aggregate data (AD) from randomised clinical trials (RCTs) are used in the majority of network meta-analyses (NMAs), other study designs (e.g., cohort studies and other non-randomised studies, NRS) can be informative about relative treatment effects. The individual participant data (IPD) of the study, when available, are preferred to AD for adjusting for important participant characteristics and to better handle heterogeneity and inconsistency in the network.

resultsWe developed the R package crossnma to perform cross-format (IPD and AD) and cross-design (RCT and NRS) NMA and network meta-regression (NMR). The models are implemented as Bayesian three-level hierarchical models using Just Another Gibbs Sampler (JAGS) software within the R environment. The R package crossnma includes functions to automatically create the JAGS model, reformat the data (based on user input), assess convergence and summarize the results. We demonstrate the workflow within crossnma by using a network of six trials comparing four treatments.

conclusionsThe R package crossnma enables the user to perform NMA and NMR with different data types in a Bayesian framework and facilitates the inclusion of all types of evidence recognising differences in risk of bias.

Indexed as

Bayes TheoremNetwork Meta-Analysis as TopicSoftwareAlgorithmsHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch DesignNetwork meta-analysisNetwork meta-regressionObservational studiesReal-world evidenceRisk of biasR package

Identifiers

PMID39103781
PMCPMC11299362

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.