Literature DB >> 32495349

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

Zhenxun Wang1, Lifeng Lin2, James S Hodges1, Haitao Chu1.   

Abstract

Bayesian analyses with the arm-based (AB) network meta-analysis (NMA) model require researchers to specify a prior distribution for the covariance matrix of the treatment-specific event rates in a transformed scale, for example, the treatment-specific log-odds when a logit transformation is used. The commonly used conjugate prior for the covariance matrix, the inverse-Wishart (IW) distribution, has several limitations. For example, although the IW distribution is often described as noninformative or weakly informative, it may in fact provide strong information when some variance components are small (eg, when the standard deviation of study-specific log-odds of a treatment is smaller than 1/2), as is common in NMAs with binary outcomes. In addition, the IW prior generally leads to underestimation of correlations between treatment-specific log-odds, which are critical for borrowing strength across treatment arms to estimate treatment effects efficiently and to reduce potential bias. Alternatively, several separation strategies (ie, separate priors on variances and correlations) can be considered. To study the IW prior's impact on NMA results and compare it with separation strategies, we did simulation studies under different missing-treatment mechanisms. A separation strategy with appropriate priors for the correlation matrix and variances performs better than the IW prior, and should be recommended as the default vague prior in the AB NMA approach. Finally, we reanalyzed three case studies and illustrated the importance, when performing AB-NMA, of sensitivity analyses with different prior specifications on variances.
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bayesian inference; covariance matrix; network meta-analysis; prior

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32495349      PMCID: PMC7486995          DOI: 10.1002/sim.8580

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  27 in total

1.  Random effects selection in linear mixed models.

Authors:  Zhen Chen; David B Dunson
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  H C Bucher; G H Guyatt; L E Griffith; S D Walter
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Bayesian multivariate meta-analysis with multiple outcomes.

Authors:  Yinghui Wei; Julian P T Higgins
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2013-02-06       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Rejoinder to the discussion of "a Bayesian missing data framework for generalized multiple outcome mixed treatment comparisons," by S. Dias and A. E. Ades.

Authors:  Hwanhee Hong; Haitao Chu; Jing Zhang; Bradley P Carlin
Journal:  Res Synth Methods       Date:  2015-10-13       Impact factor: 5.273

5.  A bivariate approach to meta-analysis.

Authors:  H C Van Houwelingen; K H Zwinderman; T Stijnen
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1993-12-30       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  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

7.  Sensitivity to Excluding Treatments in Network Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lifeng Lin; Haitao Chu; James S Hodges
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 4.822

8.  Predicting the extent of heterogeneity in meta-analysis, using empirical data from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

Authors:  Rebecca M Turner; Jonathan Davey; Mike J Clarke; Simon G Thompson; Julian Pt Higgins
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2012-03-29       Impact factor: 7.196

9.  Efficacy of pharmacotherapies for short-term smoking abstinance: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Edward J Mills; Ping Wu; Dean Spurden; Jon O Ebbert; Kumanan Wilson
Journal:  Harm Reduct J       Date:  2009-09-18

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
  5 in total

1.  BRIDGING RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AND SINGLE-ARM TRIALS USING COMMENSURATE PRIORS IN ARM-BASED NETWORK META-ANALYSIS.

Authors:  Zhenxun Wang; Lifeng Lin; Thomas Murray; James S Hodges; Haitao Chu
Journal:  Ann Appl Stat       Date:  2021-12-21       Impact factor: 1.959

2.  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

3.  Bayesian meta-analysis using SAS PROC BGLIMM.

Authors:  Kollin W Rott; Lifeng Lin; James S Hodges; Lianne Siegel; Amy Shi; Yong Chen; Haitao Chu
Journal:  Res Synth Methods       Date:  2021-07-21       Impact factor: 5.273

4.  Different Chinese herbal medicine therapy for idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura: A protocol for systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Wen-Ting Chen; Rui-Mei Tang; Ying Huang; Yan-Ping Pan; Shu-Wen Wang; Gu-Yun Wang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-04-02       Impact factor: 1.817

5.  Predictive P-score for treatment ranking in Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kristine J Rosenberger; Rui Duan; Yong Chen; Lifeng Lin
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2021-10-17       Impact factor: 4.615

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.