A graphical tool for locating inconsistency in network meta-analyses

被引:343
作者
Krahn, Ulrike [1 ]
Binder, Harald [1 ]
Koenig, Jochem [1 ]
机构
[1] Johannes Gutenberg Univ Mainz, Div Med Biometry, IMBEI, Univ Med Ctr, D-55131 Mainz, Germany
关键词
Network meta-analysis; Inconsistency; Cochran's Q; Hat matrix; CONSISTENCY; HETEROGENEITY; MODEL;
D O I
10.1186/1471-2288-13-35
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
100404 [儿少卫生与妇幼保健学];
摘要
Background: In network meta-analyses, several treatments can be compared by connecting evidence from clinical trials that have investigated two or more treatments. The resulting trial network allows estimating the relative effects of all pairs of treatments taking indirect evidence into account. For a valid analysis of the network, consistent information from different pathways is assumed. Consistency can be checked by contrasting effect estimates from direct comparisons with the evidence of the remaining network. Unfortunately, one deviating direct comparison may have side effects on the network estimates of others, thus producing hot spots of inconsistency. Methods: We provide a tool, the net heat plot, to render transparent which direct comparisons drive each network estimate and to display hot spots of inconsistency: this permits singling out which of the suspicious direct comparisons are sufficient to explain the presence of inconsistency. We base our methods on fixed-effects models. For disclosure of potential drivers, the plot comprises the contribution of each direct estimate to network estimates resulting from regression diagnostics. In combination, we show heat colors corresponding to the change in agreement between direct and indirect estimate when relaxing the assumption of consistency for one direct comparison. A clustering procedure is applied to the heat matrix in order to find hot spots of inconsistency. Results: The method is shown to work with several examples, which are constructed by perturbing the effect of single study designs, and with two published network meta-analyses. Once the possible sources of inconsistencies are identified, our method also reveals which network estimates they affect. Conclusion: Our proposal is seen to be useful for identifying sources of inconsistencies in the network together with the interrelatedness of effect estimates. It opens the way for a further analysis based on subject matter considerations.
引用
收藏
页数:18
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]
Aitken AC., 1936, P ROYAL SOC EDINBURG, V55, P42, DOI [DOI 10.1017/S0370164600014346, 10.1017/S0370164600014346]
[2]
[Anonymous], 2016, NICE DSU technical support document 4: inconsistency in networks of evidence based on randomised controlled trials
[3]
[Anonymous], 2009, INT STAT REV
[4]
[Anonymous], 4 NICE DSU
[5]
[Anonymous], 2011, R LANG ENV STAT COMP
[6]
[Anonymous], 2009, INDIRECT EVIDENCE IN
[7]
The transitive fallacy for randomized trials: If A bests B and B bests Cinseparate trials, is A better than C? [J].
Baker S.G. ;
Kramer B.S. .
BMC Medical Research Methodology, 2 (1) :1-5
[8]
Belsley D. A., 2004, REGRESSION DIAGNOSTI
[9]
The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials [J].
Bucher, HC ;
Guyatt, GH ;
Griffith, LE ;
Walter, SD .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1997, 50 (06) :683-691
[10]
Mixed treatment comparison analysis provides internally coherent treatment effect estimates based on overviews of reviews and can reveal inconsistency [J].
Caldwell, Deborah M. ;
Welton, Nicky J. ;
Ades, A. E. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2010, 63 (08) :875-882