-
Revista médica de Chile · Jan 2020
[How to interpret systematic reviews with multiple comparisons or network meta-analysis].
- Gonzalo Labarca, Juan P Uribe, Adnan Majid, Erik Folch, and Sebastián Fernandez-Bussy.
- Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Concepcion, Concepcion, Chile.
- Rev Med Chil. 2020 Jan 1; 148 (1): 109-117.
AbstractSystematic reviews evaluating multiple interventions can be useful in different clinical situations. However, some concerns arise when more than two interventions are compared and there is a paucity of good quality randomized clinical trials. A novel statistical method based on indirect comparisons, called network meta-analysis (NMA), can be a useful approach to find a clinical answer when multiple interventions are evaluated for the same outcome or comparator. The aim of this review is to describe the main characteristics and provide a user guide for a critical analysis of NMA focusing on its three main domains, namely homogeneity, transitivity and consistency.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*,_underline_or**bold**. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>and subscript<sub>text</sub>. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3., hyphens-or asterisks*. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com) - Images can be included with:
 - For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote..