articleTop 10% cited

Network meta‐analysis for indirect treatment comparisons

Statistics in Medicine · 2002 · Vol. 21(16) · pp. 2313–2324

Thomas Lumley✉(University of Washington)

Abstract

I present methods for assessing the relative effectiveness of two treatments when they have not been compared directly in a randomized trial but have each been compared to other treatments. These network meta-analysis techniques allow estimation of both heterogeneity in the effect of any given treatment and inconsistency ('incoherence') in the evidence from different pairs of treatments. A simple estimation procedure using linear mixed models is given and used in a meta-analysis of treatments for acute myocardial infarction.

Meta-analysis and systematic reviews Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeMeta-analysisRandomized controlled trialStatisticsEstimationComputer scienceEconometricsMyocardial infarctionSimple (philosophy)MedicineMathematics

MeSH terms

Fibrinolytic AgentsHumansMyocardial InfarctionTissue Plasminogen ActivatorRecombinant ProteinsMeta-Analysis as TopicModels, StatisticalThrombolytic TherapyAngioplasty

Citations

1,194

FWCI

6.71

field-weighted impact

References

Percentile

97%

vs. same field & year

Citations per year

Cited by

The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration