The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Network meta-analyses should be the highest level of evidence in treatment guidelines
Open accessOverview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Thus, when comparing the efficacy of individual antidepressants, a network meta-analysis is likely to yield more robust results than a pairwise meta-analysis.”
From Antidepressants for the treatment of adults with major depressive disorder in the maintenance phase: a systematic review and network meta-analysis (2023) · cites this paper as [58]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Vist, G. E., Kunz, R., Falck-Ytter, Y., Alonso-Coello, P., & Schünemann, H. J. (2008) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.ad · Cited by 23,305
Guyatt, G. H. (1992) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1992.03490170092032 · Cited by 4,577
Leucht, S., Cipriani, A., Spineli, L., Mavridis, D., Örey, D., Richter, F., Samara, M., Barbui, C., Engel, R. R., Geddes, J. R., et al. (2013) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)60733-3 · Cited by 2,561
Self-citationSecond-generation versus first-generation antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia: a meta-analysis
Leucht, S., Corves, C., Arbter, D., Engel, R. R., Li, C., & Davis, J. M. (2009) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(08)61764-x · Cited by 1,930
Self-citationShea, B. J., Hamel, C., Wells, G. A., Bouter, L. M., Kristjansson, E., Grimshaw, J., Henry, D. A., & Boers, M. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.009 · Cited by 1,755
Cipriani, A., Furukawa, T. A., Salanti, G., Geddes, J. R., Higgins, J. P., Churchill, R., Watanabe, N., Nakagawa, A., Omori, I. M., McGuire, H., et al. (2009) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(09)60046-5 · Cited by 1,654
Self-citationEvaluating the quality of evidence from a network meta-analysis
Salanti, G., Del Giovane, C., Chaimani, A., Caldwell, D. M., & Higgins, J. P. T. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0099682 · Cited by 1,402
Self-citationSeventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?
Bastian, H., Glasziou, P., & Chalmers, I. (2010) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000326 · Cited by 1,188
Discrepancies between Meta-Analyses and Subsequent Large Randomized, Controlled Trials
LeLorier, J., Grégoire, G., Benhaddad, A. A., Lapierre, J., & Derderian, F. (1997) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199708213370806 · Cited by 1,164
Conceptual and technical challenges in network meta-analysis
Cipriani, A., Higgins, J. P. T., Geddes, J. R., & Salanti, G. (2013) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-159-2-201307160-00008 · Cited by 1,072
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–202 of 202
López‐Moreno, M., Pérez-Díaz-del-Campo, N., Roldán‐Ruiz, A., Bertotti, G., Victoria‐Montesinos, D., & López‐Gil, J. F. (2026) · Nutrition Reviews · doi:10.1093/nutrit/nuag135
Fornaro, M., Núñez, N. A., Lorenzo, C. D., Steardo, L., Carvalho, A. F., Singh, B., Veldić, M., Solmi, M., Sambataro, F., Rapaport, M. H., et al. (2026) · European Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.euroneuro.2026.113881
Metadata
- Authors
- Leucht, S., Chaimani, A., Cipriani, A. S., Davis, J. M., Furukawa, T. A., & Salanti, G.
- Affiliations
- TUM Klinikum (DE)
- University of Ioannina (GR)
- Warneford Hospital (GB)
- University of Illinois Chicago (US)
- Kyoto University (JP)
- University of Bern (CH)
- Corresponding author
- Leucht, Stefan
- ORCID
- Venue
- European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience
- Published
- 2016-07-19
- Volume
- 266
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 477-480
- ISSN
- 0003-9373 (ISSN-L)
- 0940-1334
- 1433-8491
- OpenAlex
- W2495235786
- Cited by
- 202
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 19 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 6
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- BORIS (University Library Bern) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion)
- Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
- Keywords
- network meta-analysis, treatment guidelines, level of evidence, evidence-based medicine, guideline development
- MeSH terms
- Network Meta-Analysis, Network Meta-Analysis as Topic, Mental Disorders, Humans, Antipsychotic Agents, Guidelines as Topic, Evidence-Based Medicine
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
