Literature DB >> 22845838

The use of two-way linear mixed models in multitreatment meta-analysis.

H P Piepho1, E R Williams, L V Madden.   

Abstract

Meta-analysis summarizes the results of a series of trials. When more than two treatments are included in the trials and when the set of treatments tested differs between trials, the combination of results across trials requires some care. Several methods have been proposed for this purpose, which feature under different labels, such as network meta-analysis or mixed treatment comparisons. Two types of linear mixed model can be used for meta-analysis. The one expresses the expected outcome of treatments as a contrast to a baseline treatment. The other uses a classical two-way linear predictor with main effects for treatment and trial. In this article, we compare both types of model and explore under which conditions they give equivalent results. We illustrate practical advantages of the two-way model using two published datasets. In particular, it is shown that between-trial heterogeneity as well as inconsistency between different types of trial is straightforward to account for.
© 2012, The International Biometric Society.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22845838     DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2012.01786.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   2.571


  13 in total

1.  A matrix-based method of moments for fitting multivariate network meta-analysis models with multiple outcomes and random inconsistency effects.

Authors:  Dan Jackson; Sylwia Bujkiewicz; Martin Law; Richard D Riley; Ian R White
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2017-08-14       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Detecting outlying trials in network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jing Zhang; Haoda Fu; Bradley P Carlin
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2015-04-08       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Contrast-Based and Arm-Based Models for Network Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Amalia Karahalios; Joanne E McKenzie; Ian R White
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2022

4.  A Bayesian missing data framework for generalized multiple outcome mixed treatment comparisons.

Authors:  Hwanhee Hong; Haitao Chu; Jing Zhang; Bradley P Carlin
Journal:  Res Synth Methods       Date:  2015-11-04       Impact factor: 5.273

5.  Psychological interventions to foster resilience in healthcare professionals.

Authors:  Angela M Kunzler; Isabella Helmreich; Andrea Chmitorz; Jochem König; Harald Binder; Michèle Wessa; Klaus Lieb
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-07-05

Review 6.  Electrical stimulation and biofeedback for the treatment of fecal incontinence: a systematic review.

Authors:  Reinhard Vonthein; Tankred Heimerl; Thilo Schwandner; Andreas Ziegler
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2013-07-31       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Psychological interventions to foster resilience in healthcare students.

Authors:  Angela M Kunzler; Isabella Helmreich; Jochem König; Andrea Chmitorz; Michèle Wessa; Harald Binder; Klaus Lieb
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-07-20

8.  Network-meta analysis made easy: detection of inconsistency using factorial analysis-of-variance models.

Authors:  Hans-Peter Piepho
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2014-05-10       Impact factor: 4.615

9.  Two new methods to fit models for network meta-analysis with random inconsistency effects.

Authors:  Martin Law; Dan Jackson; Rebecca Turner; Kirsty Rhodes; Wolfgang Viechtbauer
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2016-07-28       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 10.  Get real in individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis: a review of the methodology.

Authors:  Thomas P A Debray; Karel G M Moons; Gert van Valkenhoef; Orestis Efthimiou; Noemi Hummel; Rolf H H Groenwold; Johannes B Reitsma
Journal:  Res Synth Methods       Date:  2015-08-19       Impact factor: 5.273

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.