Methodological review to develop a list of bias items used to assess reviews incorporating network meta-analysis: protocol and rationale.

Lunny, Carole; Tricco, Andrea C; Veroniki, Areti-Angeliki; Dias, Sofia; Hutton, Brian; Salanti, Georgia; Wright, James M; White, Ian; Whiting, Penny (2021). Methodological review to develop a list of bias items used to assess reviews incorporating network meta-analysis: protocol and rationale. BMJ open, 11(6), e045987. BMJ Publishing Group 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045987

[img]
Preview
Text
Lunny_BMJOpen_2021.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial (CC-BY-NC).

Download (383kB) | Preview

INTRODUCTION

Systematic reviews with network meta-analysis (NMA; ie, multiple treatment comparisons, indirect comparisons) have gained popularity and grown in number due to their ability to provide comparative effectiveness of multiple treatments for the same condition. The methodological review aims to develop a list of items relating to biases in reviews with NMA. Such a list will inform a new tool to assess the risk of bias in NMAs, and potentially other reporting or quality checklists for NMAs which are being updated.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will include articles that present items related to bias, reporting or methodological quality, articles assessing the methodological quality of reviews with NMA, or papers presenting methods for NMAs. We will search Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane library and difficult to locate/unpublished literature. Once all items have been extracted, we will combine conceptually similar items, classifying them as referring to bias or to other aspects of quality (eg, reporting). When relevant, reporting items will be reworded into items related to bias in NMA review conclusions, and then reworded as signalling questions.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethics approval was required. We plan to publish the full study open access in a peer-reviewed journal, and disseminate the findings via social media (Twitter, Facebook and author affiliated websites). Patients, healthcare providers and policy-makers need the highest quality evidence to make decisions about which treatments should be used in healthcare practice. Being able to critically appraise the findings of systematic reviews that include NMA is central to informed decision-making in patient care.

Item Type:

Journal Article (Further Contribution)

Division/Institute:

04 Faculty of Medicine > Pre-clinic Human Medicine > Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (ISPM)

UniBE Contributor:

Salanti, Georgia

Subjects:

600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health
300 Social sciences, sociology & anthropology > 360 Social problems & social services

ISSN:

2044-6055

Publisher:

BMJ Publishing Group

Language:

English

Submitter:

Doris Kopp Heim

Date Deposited:

02 Jul 2021 08:53

Last Modified:

02 Jul 2021 09:51

Publisher DOI:

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045987

PubMed ID:

34168027

Uncontrolled Keywords:

epidemiology protocols & guidelines quality in health care statistics & research methods

BORIS DOI:

10.48350/157308

URI:

https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/157308

Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback