How to Use an Article Reporting a Multiple Treatment Comparison Meta-analysis
Top Cited Papers
- 26 September 2012
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Medical Association (AMA) in JAMA
- Vol. 308 (12), 1246-1253
- https://doi.org/10.1001/2012.jama.11228
Abstract
Multiple treatment comparison (MTC) meta-analysis uses both direct (head-to-head) randomized clinical trial (RCT) evidence as well as indirect evidence from RCTs to compare the relative effectiveness of all included interventions. The methodological quality of MTCs may be difficult for clinicians to interpret because the number of interventions evaluated may be large and the methodological approaches may be complex. Clinicians and others evaluating an MTC should be aware of the potential biases that can affect the interpretation of these analyses. Readers should consider whether the primary studies are sufficiently homogeneous to combine; whether the different interventions are sufficiently similar in their populations, study designs, and outcomes; and whether the direct evidence is sufficiently similar to the indirect evidence to consider combining. This article uses the existing Users' Guides format to address study validity, interpretation of results, and application to a patient scenario.Keywords
This publication has 44 references indexed in Scilit:
- Multiple treatment comparison meta-analyses: a step forward into complexityClinical Epidemiology, 2011
- Pharmacotherapies for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysisClinical Epidemiology, 2011
- Estimating the Power of Indirect Comparisons: A Simulation StudyPLOS ONE, 2011
- Inhaled drugs to reduce exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a network meta-analysisBMC Medicine, 2009
- Why Current Publication Practices May Distort SciencePLoS Medicine, 2008
- Selective Publication of Antidepressant Trials and Its Influence on Apparent EfficacyNew England Journal of Medicine, 2008
- Effectiveness of antidepressants: an evidence myth constructed from a thousand randomized trials?Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, 2008
- Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisonsStatistics in Medicine, 2004
- Measuring inconsistency in meta-analysesBMJ, 2003
- How should meta‐regression analyses be undertaken and interpreted?Statistics in Medicine, 2002