Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

How to use an article reporting a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis


Mills, Edward J; Ioannidis, John P A; Thorlund, Kristian; Schünemann, Holger J; Puhan, Milo A; Guyatt, Gordon H (2012). How to use an article reporting a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis. JAMA : the Journal of the American Medical Association, 308(12):1246-1253.

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.

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.

Statistics

Citations

119 citations in Web of Science®
127 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

1 download since deposited on 12 Mar 2013
0 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic and Policlinic for Internal Medicine
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:2012
Deposited On:12 Mar 2013 14:22
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 16:34
Publisher:American Medical Association (AMA)
ISSN:0098-7484
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1001/2012.jama.11228
PubMed ID:23011714

Download

Preview Icon on Download
Content: Published Version
Filetype: PDF - Registered users only
Size: 271kB
View at publisher

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations