Abstract
Network meta-analysis has emerged as a method for analysing clinical trials, with a large increase in the number of publications over the past decade. Network meta-analysis offers advantages over traditional pairwise meta-analysis, including increased power, the ability to compare treatments not compared in the original trials, and the ability to rank treatments. However, network meta-analyses are inherently more complex than pairwise meta-analyses, requiring additional statistical expertise and assumptions. Many factors can affect the certainty of evidence from pairwise meta-analysis and can often lead to unreliable results. Network meta-analysis is prone to all these issues, although it has the additional assumption of transitivity. Here we review network meta-analyses, problems with their conduct and reporting, and methodological strategies that can be used by those conducting reviews to help improve the reliability of their findings. We provide evidence that violation of the assumption of transitivity is relatively common and inadequately considered in published network meta-analyses. We explain key concepts with clinically relevant examples for those unfamiliar with network meta-analysis to facilitate their appraisal and application of their results to clinical practice.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Journal | British Journal of Anaesthesia |
Volume | 134 |
Issue number | 4 |
Pages (from-to) | 1029-1040 |
Number of pages | 12 |
ISSN | 0007-0912 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2025 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2025 The Author(s)
Keywords
- network meta-analysis
- review methodology
- statistics in anaesthesia
- systematic review
- transitivity