A simulation study to compare different estimation approaches for network meta-analysis and corresponding methods to evaluate the consistency assumption

Abstract Background Network meta-analysis (NMA) is becoming increasingly popular in systematic reviews and health technology assessments. However, there is still ambiguity concerning the properties of the estimation approaches as well as for the methods to evaluate the consistency assumption. Method...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Corinna Kiefer, Sibylle Sturtz, Ralf Bender
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2020-02-01
Series:BMC Medical Research Methodology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12874-020-0917-3
id doaj-cc296cb1531d4652a5cc819041634f7e
record_format Article
spelling doaj-cc296cb1531d4652a5cc819041634f7e2020-11-25T01:45:05ZengBMCBMC Medical Research Methodology1471-22882020-02-0120111310.1186/s12874-020-0917-3A simulation study to compare different estimation approaches for network meta-analysis and corresponding methods to evaluate the consistency assumptionCorinna Kiefer0Sibylle Sturtz1Ralf Bender2Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG)Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG)Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG)Abstract Background Network meta-analysis (NMA) is becoming increasingly popular in systematic reviews and health technology assessments. However, there is still ambiguity concerning the properties of the estimation approaches as well as for the methods to evaluate the consistency assumption. Methods We conducted a simulation study for networks with up to 5 interventions. We investigated the properties of different methods and give recommendations for practical application. We evaluated the performance of 3 different models for complex networks as well as corresponding global methods to evaluate the consistency assumption. The models are the frequentist graph-theoretical approach netmeta, the Bayesian mixed treatment comparisons (MTC) consistency model, and the MTC consistency model with stepwise removal of studies contributing to inconsistency identified in a leverage plot. Results We found that with a high degree of inconsistency none of the evaluated effect estimators produced reliable results, whereas with moderate or no inconsistency the estimator from the MTC consistency model and the netmeta estimator showed acceptable properties. We also saw a dependency on the amount of heterogeneity. Concerning the evaluated methods to evaluate the consistency assumption, none was shown to be suitable. Conclusions Based on our results we recommend a pragmatic approach for practical application in NMA. The estimator from the netmeta approach or the estimator from the Bayesian MTC consistency model should be preferred. Since none of the methods to evaluate the consistency assumption showed satisfactory results, users should have a strong focus on the similarity as well as the homogeneity assumption.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12874-020-0917-3Consistency assumptionIndirect comparisonMixed treatment comparisonMultiple treatments meta-analysisNetwork meta-analysisSimulation study
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Corinna Kiefer
Sibylle Sturtz
Ralf Bender
spellingShingle Corinna Kiefer
Sibylle Sturtz
Ralf Bender
A simulation study to compare different estimation approaches for network meta-analysis and corresponding methods to evaluate the consistency assumption
BMC Medical Research Methodology
Consistency assumption
Indirect comparison
Mixed treatment comparison
Multiple treatments meta-analysis
Network meta-analysis
Simulation study
author_facet Corinna Kiefer
Sibylle Sturtz
Ralf Bender
author_sort Corinna Kiefer
title A simulation study to compare different estimation approaches for network meta-analysis and corresponding methods to evaluate the consistency assumption
title_short A simulation study to compare different estimation approaches for network meta-analysis and corresponding methods to evaluate the consistency assumption
title_full A simulation study to compare different estimation approaches for network meta-analysis and corresponding methods to evaluate the consistency assumption
title_fullStr A simulation study to compare different estimation approaches for network meta-analysis and corresponding methods to evaluate the consistency assumption
title_full_unstemmed A simulation study to compare different estimation approaches for network meta-analysis and corresponding methods to evaluate the consistency assumption
title_sort simulation study to compare different estimation approaches for network meta-analysis and corresponding methods to evaluate the consistency assumption
publisher BMC
series BMC Medical Research Methodology
issn 1471-2288
publishDate 2020-02-01
description Abstract Background Network meta-analysis (NMA) is becoming increasingly popular in systematic reviews and health technology assessments. However, there is still ambiguity concerning the properties of the estimation approaches as well as for the methods to evaluate the consistency assumption. Methods We conducted a simulation study for networks with up to 5 interventions. We investigated the properties of different methods and give recommendations for practical application. We evaluated the performance of 3 different models for complex networks as well as corresponding global methods to evaluate the consistency assumption. The models are the frequentist graph-theoretical approach netmeta, the Bayesian mixed treatment comparisons (MTC) consistency model, and the MTC consistency model with stepwise removal of studies contributing to inconsistency identified in a leverage plot. Results We found that with a high degree of inconsistency none of the evaluated effect estimators produced reliable results, whereas with moderate or no inconsistency the estimator from the MTC consistency model and the netmeta estimator showed acceptable properties. We also saw a dependency on the amount of heterogeneity. Concerning the evaluated methods to evaluate the consistency assumption, none was shown to be suitable. Conclusions Based on our results we recommend a pragmatic approach for practical application in NMA. The estimator from the netmeta approach or the estimator from the Bayesian MTC consistency model should be preferred. Since none of the methods to evaluate the consistency assumption showed satisfactory results, users should have a strong focus on the similarity as well as the homogeneity assumption.
topic Consistency assumption
Indirect comparison
Mixed treatment comparison
Multiple treatments meta-analysis
Network meta-analysis
Simulation study
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12874-020-0917-3
work_keys_str_mv AT corinnakiefer asimulationstudytocomparedifferentestimationapproachesfornetworkmetaanalysisandcorrespondingmethodstoevaluatetheconsistencyassumption
AT sibyllesturtz asimulationstudytocomparedifferentestimationapproachesfornetworkmetaanalysisandcorrespondingmethodstoevaluatetheconsistencyassumption
AT ralfbender asimulationstudytocomparedifferentestimationapproachesfornetworkmetaanalysisandcorrespondingmethodstoevaluatetheconsistencyassumption
AT corinnakiefer simulationstudytocomparedifferentestimationapproachesfornetworkmetaanalysisandcorrespondingmethodstoevaluatetheconsistencyassumption
AT sibyllesturtz simulationstudytocomparedifferentestimationapproachesfornetworkmetaanalysisandcorrespondingmethodstoevaluatetheconsistencyassumption
AT ralfbender simulationstudytocomparedifferentestimationapproachesfornetworkmetaanalysisandcorrespondingmethodstoevaluatetheconsistencyassumption
_version_ 1725025308600434688