返回
Research Techniques Made Simple: Network Meta-Analysis
DOI:10.1016/j.jid.2018.10.028.png)
摘要
En 中文
When making treatment decisions, it is often necessary to consider the relative efficacy and safety of multiple potential interventions. Unlike traditional pairwise meta-analysis, which allows for a comparison between two interventions by pooling head-to-head data, network meta-analysis (NMA) allows for the simultaneous comparison of more than two interventions and for comparisons to be made between interventions that have not been directly compared in a randomized controlled trial. Given these advantages, NMAs are being published in the medical literature with increasing frequency. However, there are important assumptions that researchers and knowledge users (e.g., patients, clinicians, and policy makers) must consider when conducting and evaluating an NMA: network connectivity, homogeneity, transitivity, and consistency. There are also multiple NMA outputs that researchers and knowledge users should familiarize themselves with in order to understand NMA results (e.g., network plots, mean ranks). Our goals in this article are to: (i) demonstrate how NMAs differ from pairwise meta-analyses, (ii) describe types of evidence in a NMA, (iii) explain NMA model assumptions, (iv) provide readers with an approach to interpreting a NMA, (v) discuss areas of ongoing methodological research, and (vi) provide a brief overview of how to conduct a systematic review and NMA.
AI总结
对已上传原文的论文进行重点信息的提取,主要内容包括:简要概述、研究摘要、背景介绍、关键亮点、图文解析、展望与总结。
期刊
IF:
5.7
论文数:
1.8W
被引数:
3.4W
机构
引用论文
The PRISMA Extension Statement for Reporting of Systematic Reviews Incorporating Network Meta-analyses of Health Care Interventions: Checklist and Explanations纳入卫生保健干预措施网络荟萃分析的系统评价报告的PRISMA扩展声明: 清单和解释
Characteristics and knowledge synthesis approach for 456 network meta-analyses: a scoping review (vol 15, 3, 2017)
BMC MEDICINE
IF8.3
Advances in the GRADE approach to rate the certainty in estimates from a network meta-analysis等级方法对网络荟萃分析估计的确定性进行评级的进展

