Integration of evidence from multiple meta-analyses: a primer on umbrella reviews, treatment networks and multiple treatments meta-analyses

Meta-analysis is an important research design for appraising evidence and guiding medical practice and health policy. [1][1] Meta-analyses draw strength from combining data from many studies. However, even if perfectly done with perfect data, a single meta-analysis that addresses 1 treatment

[1]  Blair T. Johnson,et al.  Initial Severity and Antidepressant Benefits: A Meta-Analysis of Data Submitted to the Food and Drug Administration , 2008, PLoS medicine.

[2]  D. Blacker,et al.  Systematic meta-analyses of Alzheimer disease genetic association studies: the AlzGene database , 2007, Nature Genetics.

[3]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Indirect comparisons: the mesh and mess of clinical trials , 2006, The Lancet.

[4]  Georgia Salanti,et al.  Evaluation of networks of randomized trials , 2008, Statistical methods in medical research.

[5]  F. Song,et al.  In collaboration with the International Stroke Trial Collaborative Group. Indirect comparisons of competing interventions , 2005 .

[6]  Les M Irwig,et al.  An evidence based approach to individualising treatment , 1995, BMJ.

[7]  Stefan Leucht,et al.  Why olanzapine beats risperidone, risperidone beats quetiapine, and quetiapine beats olanzapine: an exploratory analysis of head-to-head comparison studies of second-generation antipsychotics. , 2006, The American journal of psychiatry.

[8]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Completeness of safety reporting in randomized trials: an evaluation of 7 medical areas. , 2001, JAMA.

[9]  Douglas G Altman,et al.  Statistical methods for assessing the influence of study characteristics on treatment effects in ‘meta‐epidemiological’ research , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[10]  Johannes B Reitsma,et al.  Evidence of bias and variation in diagnostic accuracy studies , 2006, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[11]  Georgia Salanti,et al.  Survival and disease-progression benefits with treatment regimens for advanced colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. , 2007, The Lancet. Oncology.

[12]  M. Pfisterer,et al.  Drug eluting and bare metal stents in people with and without diabetes: collaborative network meta-analysis , 2008, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[13]  D. Altman,et al.  Outcome reporting bias in randomized trials funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research , 2004, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[14]  R. Matthews,et al.  What are the implications of optimism bias in clinical research? , 2006, The Lancet.

[15]  G. Jamtvedt,et al.  Effectiveness of Nonpharmacological and Nonsurgical Interventions for Hip Osteoarthritis: An Umbrella Review of High-Quality Systematic Reviews , 2007, Physical Therapy.

[16]  John P A Ioannidis,et al.  Perfect study, poor evidence: interpretation of biases preceding study design. , 2008, Seminars in hematology.

[17]  Simon Wandel,et al.  Outcomes associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: a collaborative network meta-analysis , 2007, The Lancet.

[18]  Christian Gluud,et al.  Reported Methodologic Quality and Discrepancies between Large and Small Randomized Trials in Meta-Analyses , 2001, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[19]  Lisa Bero,et al.  Factors Associated with Findings of Published Trials of Drug–Drug Comparisons: Why Some Statins Appear More Efficacious than Others , 2007, PLoS medicine.

[20]  Kumanan Wilson,et al.  Effectiveness of smoking cessation therapies: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2006, BMC public health.

[21]  Douglas G Altman,et al.  Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[22]  Deborah M Caldwell,et al.  Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[23]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Quality of reporting of cancer prognostic marker studies: association with reported prognostic effect. , 2007, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[24]  A. Hrõbjartsson,et al.  Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. , 2004, JAMA.

[25]  T. Lumley.  Network meta‐analysis for indirect treatment comparisons , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[26]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Effectiveness of antidepressants: an evidence myth constructed from a thousand randomized trials? , 2008, Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM.

[27]  John P A Ioannidis,et al.  Reasons or excuses for avoiding meta-analysis in forest plots , 2008, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[28]  John P A Ioannidis,et al.  Systematic meta-analyses and field synopsis of genetic association studies in schizophrenia: the SzGene database , 2008, Nature Genetics.

[29]  John P A Ioannidis,et al.  Almost all articles on cancer prognostic markers report statistically significant results. , 2007, European journal of cancer.

[30]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Relative Citation Impact of Various Study Designs in the Health Sciences , 2005, JAMA.

[31]  G. Lu,et al.  Assessing Evidence Inconsistency in Mixed Treatment Comparisons , 2006 .

[32]  D. Cook,et al.  Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? , 1998, The Lancet.

[33]  Georgia Salanti,et al.  Multiple-treatments meta-analysis of chemotherapy and targeted therapies in advanced breast cancer. , 2008, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[34]  D G Altman,et al.  Indirect comparisons of competing interventions. , 2005, Health technology assessment.

[35]  C. Gamble,et al.  Topical antibiotics without steroids for chronically discharging ears with underlying eardrum perforations. , 2005, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[36]  D. Henson,et al.  The effectiveness of the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph and laser diagnostic glaucoma scanning system (GDx) in detecting and monitoring glaucoma. , 2005, Health technology assessment.

[37]  E. Winer,et al.  Association between pharmaceutical involvement and outcomes in breast cancer clinical trials , 2007, Cancer.

[38]  R. J. Hayes,et al.  Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. , 1995, JAMA.

[39]  A. Owen,et al.  Combined resynchronisation and implantable defibrillator therapy in left ventricular dysfunction: Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials , 2007, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[40]  Jonathan AC Sterne,et al.  Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy , 2005, The Lancet.

[41]  John Ioannidis,et al.  Exploring the Geometry of Treatment Networks , 2008, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[42]  L. Hirsch.  Competing interests: none declared. , 2006 .

[43]  J. O'Loughlin,et al.  Pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials , 2008, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[44]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Evaluation of the potential excess of statistically significant findings in published genetic association studies: application to Alzheimer's disease. , 2008, American journal of epidemiology.

[45]  John P A Ioannidis,et al.  Availability of large-scale evidence on specific harms from systematic reviews of randomized trials. , 2004, The American journal of medicine.

[46]  P. Bossuyt,et al.  Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. , 1999, JAMA.

[47]  Ethan M Balk,et al.  Correlation of quality measures with estimates of treatment effect in meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. , 2002, JAMA.

[48]  Douglas G Altman,et al.  Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study , 2008, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[49]  I Harvey,et al.  Adjusted indirect comparison may be less biased than direct comparison for evaluating new pharmaceutical interventions. , 2008, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[50]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Evolution of treatment effects over time: empirical insight from recursive cumulative metaanalyses. , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[51]  J. Ioannidis.  Why Most Discovered True Associations Are Inflated , 2008, Epidemiology.

[52]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  An exploratory test for an excess of significant findings , 2007, Clinical trials.

[53]  J. Hilden,et al.  Multivariable modelling for meta‐epidemiological assessment of the association between trial quality and treatment effects estimated in randomized clinical trials , 2007, Statistics in medicine.

[54]  D. Altman,et al.  Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomised trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.