Cited by 198Meta-analysis and systematic reviewsStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsMental Health Research Topics

A primer on network meta-analysis with emphasis on mental health

Open access
Mavridis, Dimitris, Giannatsi, Myrsini, Cipriani, Andrea, Salanti, Georgia·2015·Evidence Based Mental Health

Abstract

Objective: A quantitative synthesis of evidence via standard pair-wise meta-analysis lies on the top of the hierarchy for evaluating the relative effectiveness or safety between two interventions. In most healthcare problems, however, there is a plethora of competing interventions. Network meta-analysis allows to rank competing interventions and evaluate their relative effectiveness even if they have not been compared in an individual trial. The aim of this paper is to explain and discuss the main features of this statistical technique. Methods: We present the key assumptions underlying network meta-analysis and the graphical methods to visualise results and information in the network. We used one illustrative example that compared the relative effectiveness of 15 antimanic drugs and placebo in acute mania. Results: A network plot allows to visualise how information flows in the network and reveals important information about network geometry. Discrepancies between direct and indirect evidence can be detected using inconsistency plots. Relative effectiveness or safety of competing interventions can be presented in a league table. A contribution plot reveals the contribution of each direct comparison to each network estimate. A comparison-adjusted funnel plot is an extension of simple funnel plot to network meta-analysis. A rank probability matrix can be estimated to present the probabilities of all interventions assuming each rank and can be represented using rankograms and cumulative probability plots. Conclusions: Network meta-analysis is very helpful in comparing the relative effectiveness and acceptability of competing treatments. Several issues, however, still need to be addressed when conducting a network meta-analysis for the results to be valid and correctly interpreted.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/eb-2015-102088

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Previous pairwise meta-analyses could not answer these clinical questions because few trials have directly compared different types of psychotherapies.

    “However, previous pairwise meta-analyses could not answer these clinical questions,13,14 because few trials have directly compared different types of psychotherapies.15”

    From Different Types and Acceptability of Psychotherapies for Acute Anxiety Disorders in Children and Adolescents: A Network Meta-analysis (2019) · cites this paper as [14]

    The Introduction explains that network meta-analysis can use indirect comparisons when interventions have not been compared directly. It does not say that few trials directly compare different types of psychotherapies; searches for psychotherapy and head-to-head comparisons found no passage establishing that claim. (LLM, conf=0.70)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Network meta-analyses can combine multiple comparisons, use direct and indirect evidence, make better estimates, have more statistical power, and present consolidated comparisons.

    “Network metaanalyses can combine multiple comparisons in one analysis, are able to use direct and indirect evidence, and thus make optimal use of all available evidence.These analyses consequently make better estimates of the differences between treatments, have more statistical power to examine moderators of outcome, and can present consolidated comparisons among alternative treatments 16 .”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Statistics in practice on January 29, 2024 by guest. Protected by copyright. http://mentalhealth.bmj.com/ Evid Based Mental Health: first published as 10.1136/eb-2015-102088 on 23 April 2015. Downloaded from REFERENCES

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mavridis, D., Giannatsi, M., Cipriani, A., & Salanti, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Ioannina (GR)
  • Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, University of Ioannina School of Medicine, Ioannina, Greece;
  • University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Mavridis, Dimitris
Venue
Evidence Based Mental Health
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2015-04-23
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
40-46
ISSN
  • 1362-0347 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-960X
OpenAlex
W2085805157
Cited by
198
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
17.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Evidence-Based Mental Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • FP7 Ideas: European Research Council (260559)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
Keywords
network meta-analysis, mental health interventions, acute mania, antimanic drugs, relative effectiveness, league tables, contribution plots, placebo comparison
MeSH terms
Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Mental Health, Meta-Analysis 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