Chaimani, Anna; Caldwell, Deborah M; Li, Tianjing; Higgins, Julian Pt; Salanti, Georgia (2017). Additional considerations are required when preparing a protocol for a systematic review with multiple interventions. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 83, pp. 65-74. Elsevier 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.11.015
![[img]](https://boris.unibe.ch/style/images/fileicons/text.png) |
Text
Chaimani JClinEpidemiol 2017.pdf - Published Version Restricted to registered users only Available under License Publisher holds Copyright. Download (189kB) |
|
|
Text
Chaimani JClinEpidemiol 2017_manuscript.pdf - Accepted Version Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works (CC-BY-NC-ND). Download (535kB) | Preview |
OBJECTIVES
The number of systematic reviews that aim to compare multiple interventions using network meta-analysis is increasing. In this paper, we highlight aspects of a standard systematic review protocol that may need modification when multiple interventions are to be compared.
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING
We take the protocol format suggested by Cochrane for a standard systematic review as our reference, and compare the considerations for a pairwise review with those required for a valid comparison of multiple interventions. We suggest new sections for protocols of systematic reviews including network meta-analyses with a focus on how to evaluate their assumptions. We provide example text from published protocols to exemplify the considerations.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION
Standard systematic review protocols for pairwise meta-analyses need extensions to accommodate the increased complexity of network meta-analysis. Our suggested modifications are widely applicable to both Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews involving network meta-analyses.
Item Type: |
Journal Article (Original Article) |
|---|---|
Division/Institute: |
04 Faculty of Medicine > Pre-clinic Human Medicine > Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (ISPM) 04 Faculty of Medicine > Medical Education > Institute of General Practice and Primary Care (BIHAM) |
UniBE Contributor: |
Salanti, Georgia |
Subjects: |
600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health 300 Social sciences, sociology & anthropology > 360 Social problems & social services |
ISSN: |
0895-4356 |
Publisher: |
Elsevier |
Language: |
English |
Submitter: |
Doris Kopp Heim |
Date Deposited: |
24 Jan 2017 15:03 |
Last Modified: |
05 Dec 2022 15:02 |
Publisher DOI: |
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.11.015 |
PubMed ID: |
28088593 |
Uncontrolled Keywords: |
comparative effectiveness review; eligibility criteria; transitivity; network meta-analysis; indirect comparison; mixed treatment comparison |
BORIS DOI: |
10.7892/boris.94317 |
URI: |
https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/94317 |
Actions (login required)
 |
Edit item |