ArticleBMC medical research methodology2024
Beading plot: a novel graphics for ranking interventions in network evidence.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The comparative efficacy and safety of sweet solutions to reduce preterm infants' pain levels: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2026Pooled it
- The Response to "Global Landscape of Nasolabial Folds Research: Hotspots, Gaps, and Future Directions".Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2025Article
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
backgroundNetwork meta-analysis is developed to compare all available treatments; therefore it enriches evidence for clinical decision-making, offering insights into treatment effectiveness and safety when faced with multiple options. However, the complexity and numerous treatment comparisons in network meta-analysis can challenge healthcare providers and patients. The purpose of this study aimed to introduce a graphic design to present complex rankings of multiple interventions comprehensively.
methodsOur team members developed a "beading plot" to summary probability of achieving the best treatment (P-best) and global metrics including surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) and P-score. Implemented via the "rankinma" R package, this tool summarizes rankings across diverse outcomes in network meta-analyses, and the package received an official release on the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN). It includes the `PlotBead()` function for generating beading plots, which represent treatment rankings among various outcomes.
resultsBeading plot has been designed based on number line plot, which effectively displays collective metrics for each treatment across various outcomes. Order on the -axis is derived from ranking metrics like P-best, SUCRA, and P-score. Continuous lines represent outcomes, and color-coded beads signify treatments.
conclusionThe beading plot is a valuable graphic that intuitively displays treatment rankings across diverse outcomes, enhancing reader-friendliness and aiding decision-making in complex network evidence scenarios. While empowering clinicians and patients to identify optimal treatments, it should be used cautiously, alongside an assessment of the overall evidence certainty.
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.