Method's corner: Allergist's guide to network meta-analysis.
Allergy and Immunology
GRADE approach
McMaster
atopic dermatitis
clinical decision making
coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)
critical appraisal
eczema
evidence-based medicine (EBM)
guidelines
indirect treatment comparison (ITC)
multiple treatment comparison (MTC)
network meta-analysis (NMA)
probiotics
statistics
systematic review
therapy management options
user's guide
Journal
Pediatric allergy and immunology : official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology
ISSN: 1399-3038
Titre abrégé: Pediatr Allergy Immunol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9106718
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2022
01 2022
Historique:
revised:
22
07
2021
received:
14
06
2021
accepted:
26
07
2021
pubmed:
30
7
2021
medline:
11
1
2022
entrez:
29
7
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Network meta-analyses (NMAs) simultaneously estimate the effects of multiple possible treatment options for a given clinical presentation. For allergists to benefit optimally from NMAs, they must understand the process and be able to interpret the results. Through a worked example published in Pediatric Allergy and Immunology, we summarize how to identify credible NMAs and interpret them with a focus on recent innovations in the GRADE approach (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). NMAs build on traditional systematic reviews and meta-analyses that consider only direct paired comparisons by including indirect evidence, thus allowing the simultaneous assessment of the relative effect of all pairs of competing alternatives. Our framework informs clinicians of how to identify credible NMAs and address the certainty of the evidence. Trustworthy NMAs fill a critical gap in providing key inferences using direct and indirect evidence to inform clinical decision making when faced with more than two competing courses of treatment options. This document will help allergists to identify trustworthy NMAs to enhance patient care.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e13609Informations de copyright
© 2021 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
Références
Murad MH, Montori VM, Ioannidis JPA, et al. How to read a systematic review and meta-analysis and apply the results to patient care: users’ guides to the medical literature. JAMA. 2014;312(2):171-179. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.5559
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336:924-926.
Tan-Lim CSC, Esteban-Ipac NAR, Recto MST, Castor MAR, Casis-Hao RJ, Nano ALM. Comparative effectiveness of probiotic strains on the prevention of pediatric atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Pediatr Allergy Immunol. 2021;32(6):1255-1270.
Bucher HC, Cook DJ, Holbrook AM, et al. Surrogate Outcomes. In: Guyatt G, Rennie D, Meade MO, et al., eds. Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature: A Manual for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice, 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill Education; 2015. jamaevidence.mhmedical.com/content.aspx?aid=1127443758 (accessed 3 Aug 2021).
Walter SD, Sun X, Heels-Ansdell D, Guyatt G. Treatment effects on patient-important outcomes can be small, even with large effects on surrogate markers. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012;65:940-945.
Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al. (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons; 2019.
Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, et al. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:383-394.
Li T, Puhan MA, Vedula SS, Singh S, Dickersin K, The Ad Hoc Network Meta-analysis Methods Meeting Working Group. Network meta-analysis-highly attractive but more methodological research is needed. BMC Med. 2011;9:79.
Brignardello-Petersen R, Florez ID, Izcovich A, et al. GRADE approach to drawing conclusions from a network meta-analysis using a minimally contextualised framework. BMJ. 2020;371:m3900.
Santesso N, Glenton C, Dahm P, et al. GRADE guidelines 26: informative statements to communicate the findings of systematic reviews of interventions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020;119:126-135.
Sterne JAC, Savovic J, Page MJ, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2019;366:l4898.
Siemieniuk RA, Bartoszko JJ, Ge L, et al. Drug treatments for covid-19: living systematic review and network meta-analysis. BMJ. 2020;370:m2980.
Stahl TW. A network diagram for our times, vol. 2020. The BMJ Opinion: The BMJ 2020.