The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2288-14-61) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
The author declares that there are no competing interests.
Network meta-analysis can be used to combine results from several randomized trials involving more than two treatments. Potential inconsistency among different types of trial (designs) differing in the set of treatments tested is a major challenge, and application of procedures for detecting and locating inconsistency in trial networks is a key step in the conduct of such analyses.
Network meta-analysis can be very conveniently performed using factorial analysis-of-variance methods. Inconsistency can be scrutinized by inspecting the design × treatment interaction. This approach is in many ways simpler to implement than the more common approach of using treatment-versus-control contrasts.
We show that standard regression diagnostics available in common linear mixed model packages can be used to detect and locate inconsistency in trial networks. Moreover, a suitable definition of factors and effects allows devising significance tests for inconsistency.
Factorial analysis of variance provides a convenient framework for conducting network meta-analysis, including diagnostic checks for inconsistency.
Donegan S, Williamson P, D’Allesandro U, Smith CT: Assessing key assumptions of network meta-analysis: a review of methods. Res Synth Meth. 2013, 4 (4): 291-323. 10.1002/jrsm.1085. CrossRef
Higgins JPT, Jackson D, Barrett JK, Lu G, Ades AE, White IR: Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: concepts and models for multi-arm studies. Res Synth Meth. 2012, 3: 98-110. 10.1002/jrsm.1044. CrossRef
White IR, Barrett JK, Jackson D, Higgins JPT: Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: model estimation using multivariate meta-regression. Res Synth Meth. 2012, 3: 111-125. 10.1002/jrsm.1045. CrossRef
Searle SR, Casella G, McCulloch CE: Variance Components. 1992, New York: John Wiley & Sons CrossRef
Wilkinson GN, Rogers CE: Symbolic description of factorial models for analysis of variance. Appl Stat. 1973, 22: 392-399. 10.2307/2346786. CrossRef
McCullagh P, Nelder JA: Generalized Linear Models. 1989, London: Chapman & Hall, 2 CrossRef
Piepho HP, Büchse A, Richter C: A mixed modelling approach to randomized experiments with repeated measures. J Agron Crop Sci. 2004, 190: 230-247. 10.1111/j.1439-037X.2004.00097.x. CrossRef
Lu G, Welton NJ, Higgins JPT, White IR, Ades AE: Linear inference for mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis: A two-stage approach. Res Synth Meth. 2011, 2: 43-60. 10.1002/jrsm.34. CrossRef
Möhring J, Piepho HP: Comparison of weighting in two-stage analyses of series of experiments. Crop Sci. 2009, 49: 1977-1988. 10.2135/cropsci2009.02.0083. CrossRef
Whitehead A: Meta-Analysis of Controlled Clinical Trials. 2002, New York: Wiley & Sons CrossRef
Nelder JA: Linear models: back to basics. Stat Comput. 1994, 4: 221-234. 10.1007/BF00156745. CrossRef
Belsley DA, Kuh E, Welsch RE: Regression Diagnostics; Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity. 1980, New York: John Wiley & Sons CrossRef
Cook RD, Weisberg S: Residuals and Influence in Regression. 1982, New York: Chapman and Hall
Piepho HP: A SAS macro for generating letter displays of pairwise mean comparisons. Commun Biometry Crop Sci. 2012, 7: 4-13.
- Network-meta analysis made easy: detection of inconsistency using factorial analysis-of-variance models
- BioMed Central
Neu im Fachgebiet AINS
Meistgelesene Bücher aus dem Fachgebiet AINS
Mail Icon II