Conducting Indirect-Treatment-Comparison and Network-Meta-Analysis Studies- Report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices- Part 2

Jun 1, 2011, 00:00 AM
Section Title : Scientific Reports
Section Order : 3
First Page : 429

Evidence-based health care decision making requires comparison of all relevant competing interventions. In the absence of randomized controlled trials involving a direct comparison of all treatments of interest, indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis provide useful evidence for judiciously selecting the best treatment(s). Mixed treatment comparisons, a special case of network meta-analysis, combine direct evidence and indirect evidence for particular pairwise comparisons, thereby synthesizing a greater share of the available evidence than traditional meta-analysis. This report from the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices Task Force provides guidance on technical aspects of conducting network meta-analyses (our use of this term includes most methods that involve meta-analysis in the context of a network of evidence). We start with a discussion of strategies for developing networks of evidence. Next we briefly review assumptions of network meta-analysis. Then we focus on the statistical analysis of the data: objectives, models (fixed-effects and random-effects), frequentist versus Bayesian approaches, and model validation. A checklist highlights key components of network meta-analysis, and substantial examples illustrate indirect treatment comparisons (both frequentist and Bayesian approaches) and network meta-analysis. A further section discusses eight key areas for future research.
HEOR Topics :
  • Best Research Practices
  • Clinical Outcomes
  • Comparative Effectiveness or Efficacy
  • Meta-Analysis & Indirect Comparisons
  • Organizational Practices
  • Study Approaches
Tags :
  • Bayesian meta-analysis
  • direct treatment comparison
  • evidence network
  • frequentist meta-analysis
  • heterogeneity
  • inconsistency
  • indirect treatment comparison
  • mixed treatment comparison
Regions :
  • Global