Literature DB >> 26536149

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

Hwanhee Hong1, Haitao Chu2, Jing Zhang3, Bradley P Carlin2.   

Abstract

Bayesian statistical approaches to mixed treatment comparisons (MTCs) are becoming more popular because of their flexibility and interpretability. Many randomized clinical trials report multiple outcomes with possible inherent correlations. Moreover, MTC data are typically sparse (although richer than standard meta-analysis, comparing only two treatments), and researchers often choose study arms based upon which treatments emerge as superior in previous trials. In this paper, we summarize existing hierarchical Bayesian methods for MTCs with a single outcome and introduce novel Bayesian approaches for multiple outcomes simultaneously, rather than in separate MTC analyses. We do this by incorporating partially observed data and its correlation structure between outcomes through contrast-based and arm-based parameterizations that consider any unobserved treatment arms as missing data to be imputed. We also extend the model to apply to all types of generalized linear model outcomes, such as count or continuous responses. We offer a simulation study under various missingness mechanisms (e.g., missing completely at random, missing at random, and missing not at random) providing evidence that our models outperform existing models in terms of bias, mean squared error, and coverage probability then illustrate our methods with a real MTC dataset. We close with a discussion of our results, several contentious issues in MTC analysis, and a few avenues for future methodological development.
Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bayesian hierarchical model; Markov chain Monte Carlo; missingness mechanism; network meta-analysis

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26536149      PMCID: PMC4779385          DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1153

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Res Synth Methods        ISSN: 1759-2879            Impact factor:   5.273


  39 in total

1.  Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons.

Authors:  Thomas Lumley
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2002-08-30       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 2.  Investigating incoherence gives insight: clopidogrel is equivalent to extended-release dipyridamole plus aspirin in secondary stroke prevention.

Authors:  Sarah Dewilde; Neil Hawkins
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  How vague is vague? A simulation study of the impact of the use of vague prior distributions in MCMC using WinBUGS.

Authors:  Paul C Lambert; Alex J Sutton; Paul R Burton; Keith R Abrams; David R Jones
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2005-08-15       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  The BUGS project: Evolution, critique and future directions.

Authors:  David Lunn; David Spiegelhalter; Andrew Thomas; Nicky Best
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 2.373

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

Authors:  H P Piepho; E R Williams; L V Madden
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2012-07-27       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Comparing Bayesian and frequentist approaches for multiple outcome mixed treatment comparisons.

Authors:  Hwanhee Hong; Bradley P Carlin; Tatyana A Shamliyan; Jean F Wyman; Rema Ramakrishnan; François Sainfort; Robert L Kane
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2013-04-02       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  Bayesian network meta-analysis for unordered categorical outcomes with incomplete data.

Authors:  Christopher H Schmid; Thomas A Trikalinos; Ingram Olkin
Journal:  Res Synth Methods       Date:  2013-12-13       Impact factor: 5.273

8.  Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis.

Authors:  S Dias; N J Welton; D M Caldwell; A E Ades
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-03-30       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 9.  Is network meta-analysis as valid as standard pairwise meta-analysis? It all depends on the distribution of effect modifiers.

Authors:  Jeroen P Jansen; Huseyin Naci
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2013-07-04       Impact factor: 8.775

Review 10.  Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence.

Authors:  Deborah M Caldwell; A E Ades; J P T Higgins
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-10-15
View more
  39 in total

1.  Multivariate network meta-analysis to mitigate the effects of outcome reporting bias.

Authors:  Hyunsoo Hwang; Stacia M DeSantis
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2018-06-07       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  A Bayesian hierarchical model for network meta-analysis of multiple diagnostic tests.

Authors:  Xiaoye Ma; Qinshu Lian; Haitao Chu; Joseph G Ibrahim; Yong Chen
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2018-01-01       Impact factor: 5.899

3.  Quantifying and presenting overall evidence in network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lifeng Lin
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2018-07-18       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  The impact of covariance priors on arm-based Bayesian network meta-analyses with binary outcomes.

Authors:  Zhenxun Wang; Lifeng Lin; James S Hodges; Haitao Chu
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2020-06-03       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  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

6.  Fragility index of network meta-analysis with application to smoking cessation data.

Authors:  Aiwen Xing; Haitao Chu; Lifeng Lin
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2020-07-10       Impact factor: 6.437

7.  Bayesian hierarchical methods for meta-analysis combining randomized-controlled and single-arm studies.

Authors:  Jing Zhang; Chia-Wen Ko; Lei Nie; Yong Chen; Ram Tiwari
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2018-02-13       Impact factor: 3.021

8.  A Bayesian approach to discrete multiple outcome network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Rebecca Graziani; Sergio Venturini
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  On evidence cycles in network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lifeng Lin; Haitao Chu; James S Hodges
Journal:  Stat Interface       Date:  2020       Impact factor: 0.582

10.  A variance shrinkage method improves arm-based Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zhenxun Wang; Lifeng Lin; James S Hodges; Richard MacLehose; Haitao Chu
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2020-08-05       Impact factor: 3.021

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.