Author:
McKeen Lauren,Morris Paul,Wang Chong,Morris Max D.,O’Connor Annette M.
Abstract
Abstract
Background
In network meta-analysis, estimation of a comparative effect can be performed for treatments that are connected either directly or indirectly. However, disconnected trial networks may arise, which poses a challenge to comparing all available treatments of interest. Several modeling approaches attempt to compare treatments from disconnected networks but not without strong assumptions and limitations. Conducting a new trial to connect a disconnected network can enable calculation of all treatment comparisons and help researchers maximize the value of the existing networks. Here, we develop an approach to finding the best connecting trial given a specific comparison of interest.
Methods
We present formulas to quantify the variation in the estimation of a particular comparative effect of interest for any possible connecting two-arm trial. We propose a procedure to identify the optimal connecting trial that minimizes this variation in effect estimation.
Results
We show that connecting two treatments indirectly might be preferred to direct connection through a new trial, by leveraging information from the existing disconnected networks. Using a real network of studies on the use of vaccines in the treatment of bovine respiratory disease (BRD), we illustrate a procedure to identify the best connecting trial and confirm our findings via simulation.
Conclusion
Researchers wishing to conduct a connecting two-arm study can use the procedure provided here to identify the best connecting trial. The choice of trial that minimizes the variance of a comparison of interest is network dependent and it is possible that connecting treatments indirectly may be preferred to direct connection.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health Informatics,Epidemiology
Reference18 articles.
1. Rücker G, Schmitz S, Schwarzer G. Component network meta-analysis compared to a matching method in a disconnected network: A case study. Biom J. 2021;63(2):447–61.
2. Goring SM, Gustafson P, Liu Y, Saab S, Cline SK, Platt RW. Disconnected by design: analytic approach in treatment networks having no common comparator. Res Biom J. 2016;7(4):420–32.
3. Godolhin JD. Simple pilot procedures for the avoidance of disconnected experimental designs. JRSSC (Appl Statist). 2004;53(1):133–47.
4. Jenkins D, Martina R, Dequen P, Bujkiewicz S, Abrams K. The Added Value of Real-World Evidence to Connect Disconnected Networks for Network Meta-Analysis: A Case Study in Rheumatoid Arthritis. Value Health. 2016;19(7):A393–A393.
5. Stevens JW, Fletcher C, Downey G, Sutton A. A review of methods for comparing treatments evaluated in studies that form disconnected networks of evidence. Res Synth Methods. 2018;9(2):148–62.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献