The PRISMA Extension Statement for Reporting of Systematic Reviews Incorporating Network Meta-analyses of Health Care Interventions: Checklist and Explanations

The PRISMA statement is a reporting guideline designed to improve the completeness of reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Authors have used this guideline worldwide to prepare their reviews for publication. In the past, these reports typically compared 2 treatment alternatives. With the evolution of systematic reviews that compare multiple treatments, some of them only [...]

2017-07-03T23:12:54+00:00June 2nd, 2015|Publications, Research|

Reforming Medicare’s Dialysis Payment Policies: Implications for Patients with Secondary Hyperparathyroidism

Expanding services covered by a “bundled payment” can also expand variation in the costs of treating patients under the bundle. In this article, Charu Gupta et al.explore this topic further using the Medicare dialysis program as an example. Source: Health Services Research

2017-07-03T23:01:17+00:00July 14th, 2014|Publications, Research|

Reforming Medicare’s Dialysis Payment Policies: Implications for Patients with Secondary Hyperparathyroidism

Expanding services covered by a “bundled payment” can also expand variation in the costs of treating patients under the bundle. In this article, Charu Gupta et al.explore this topic further using the Medicare dialysis program as an example. Source: Health Services Research

2017-07-03T23:16:18+00:00July 7th, 2014|Publications, Research|

Indirect Treatment Comparison/Network Meta-Analysis Study Questionnaire to Assess Relevance and Credibility to Inform Health Care Decision Making: An ISPOR-AMCP-NPC Good Practice Task Force Report

Despite the great realized or potential value of network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial evidence to inform health care decision making, many decision makers might not be familiar with these techniques. The Task Force developed a consensus-based 26-item questionnaire to help decision makers assess the relevance and the credibility of indirect treatment comparisons and network [...]

2017-07-03T22:31:22+00:00March 15th, 2014|Publications, Research|

Is network meta-analysis as valid as standard pairwise meta-analysis? It all depends on the distribution of effect modifiers.

In the last decade, network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials has been introduced as an extension of pairwise meta-analysis. The advantage of network meta-analysis over standard pairwise meta-analysis is that it facilitates indirect comparisons of multiple interventions that have not been studied in a head-to-head fashion. Although assumptions underlying pairwise meta-analyses are well understood, those [...]

2017-07-04T17:58:07+00:00July 4th, 2013|Publications, Research|

Meta-regression Models to Address Heterogeneity and Inconsistency in Network Meta-analysis of Survival Outcomes

Recently, network meta-analysis of survival data with a multidimensional treatment effect was introduced. With these models the hazard ratio is not assumed to be constant over time, thereby reducing the possibility of violating transitivity in indirect comparisons. However, bias is still present if there are systematic differences in treatment effect modifiers across comparisons. It was [...]

2017-07-03T22:35:22+00:00October 8th, 2012|Publications, Research|

Accounting for Correlation in Network Meta-analysis with Multi-arm Trials

Multi-arm trials are particularly valuable forms of evidence for network meta-analysis (NMA). Trial results are available either as arm-level summaries, where effect measures are reported for each arm or as contrast-level summaries, where the differences in effect between arms compare with the control arm chosen for the trial. We show that likelihood-based inference in both [...]

2017-07-03T22:38:45+00:00July 20th, 2012|Publications, Research|

Conducting Indirect-Treatment-Comparison and Network-Meta-Analysis Studies: Report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices—Part 2

Evidence-based health care decision making requires comparison of all relevant competing interventions. In the absence of randomized controlled trials involving a direct comparison of all treatments of interest, indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis provide useful evidence for judiciously selecting the best treatment(s). Mixed treatment comparisons, a special case of network meta-analysis, combine direct evidence [...]

2017-07-03T22:45:35+00:00June 12th, 2011|Publications, Research|

Interpreting Indirect Treatment Comparisons and Network Meta-Analysis for Health-Care Decision Making: Report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: Part 1

Evidence-based health-care decision making requires comparisons of all relevant competing interventions. In the absence of randomized, controlled trials involving a direct comparison of all treatments of interest, indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis provide useful evidence for judiciously selecting the best choice(s) of treatment. Mixed treatment comparisons, a special case of network meta-analysis, combine direct [...]

2017-07-03T22:44:02+00:00June 12th, 2011|Publications, Research|

Network Meta-analysis of Survival Data with Fractional Polynomials

Pairwise meta-analysis, indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis for aggregate level survival data are often based on the reported hazard ratio, which relies on the proportional hazards assumption. This assumption is implausible when hazard functions intersect, and can have a huge impact on decisions based on comparisons of expected survival, such as cost-effectiveness analysis. As [...]

2017-07-03T22:40:29+00:00May 1st, 2011|Publications, Research|