Multiple treatment comparison meta-analyses: a step forward into complexity
Author(s) -
Edward Mills,
Nick Bansback,
Ghement,
Tholund,
Steven Kelly,
Milo A. Puhan,
James R. Wright
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
clinical epidemiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.868
H-Index - 58
ISSN - 1179-1349
DOI - 10.2147/clep.s16526
Subject(s) - meta analysis , context (archaeology) , medicine , transparency (behavior) , clinical trial , sample size determination , comparative effectiveness research , computer science , management science , data science , alternative medicine , pathology , statistics , paleontology , computer security , mathematics , economics , biology
The use of meta-analysis has become increasingly useful for clinical and policy decision making. A recent development in meta-analysis, multiple treatment comparison (MTC) meta-analysis, provides inferences on the comparative effectiveness of interventions that may have never been directly evaluated in clinical trials. This new approach may be confusing for clinicians and methodologists and raises specific challenges relevant to certain areas of medicine. This article addresses the methodological concepts of MTC meta-analysis, including issues of heterogeneity, choice of model, and adequacy of sample sizes. We address domain-specific challenges relevant to disciplines of medicine, including baseline risks of patient populations. We conclude that MTC meta-analysis is a useful tool in the context of comparative effectiveness and requires further study, as its utility and transparency will likely predict its uptake by the research and clinical community.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom