Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2014

Open Access 01-12-2014 | Research article

Network-meta analysis made easy: detection of inconsistency using factorial analysis-of-variance models

Author: Hans-Peter Piepho

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Network meta-analysis can be used to combine results from several randomized trials involving more than two treatments. Potential inconsistency among different types of trial (designs) differing in the set of treatments tested is a major challenge, and application of procedures for detecting and locating inconsistency in trial networks is a key step in the conduct of such analyses.

Methods

Network meta-analysis can be very conveniently performed using factorial analysis-of-variance methods. Inconsistency can be scrutinized by inspecting the design × treatment interaction. This approach is in many ways simpler to implement than the more common approach of using treatment-versus-control contrasts.

Results

We show that standard regression diagnostics available in common linear mixed model packages can be used to detect and locate inconsistency in trial networks. Moreover, a suitable definition of factors and effects allows devising significance tests for inconsistency.

Conclusion

Factorial analysis of variance provides a convenient framework for conducting network meta-analysis, including diagnostic checks for inconsistency.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Krahn U, Binder H, König J: A graphical tool for locating inconsistency in network meta-analysis. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013, 13: 35-10.1186/1471-2288-13-35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Krahn U, Binder H, König J: A graphical tool for locating inconsistency in network meta-analysis. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013, 13: 35-10.1186/1471-2288-13-35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
go back to reference Donegan S, Williamson P, D’Allesandro U, Smith CT: Assessing key assumptions of network meta-analysis: a review of methods. Res Synth Meth. 2013, 4 (4): 291-323. 10.1002/jrsm.1085.CrossRef Donegan S, Williamson P, D’Allesandro U, Smith CT: Assessing key assumptions of network meta-analysis: a review of methods. Res Synth Meth. 2013, 4 (4): 291-323. 10.1002/jrsm.1085.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Lu G, Ades AE: Combining direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2004, 23: 3105-3124. 10.1002/sim.1875.CrossRefPubMed Lu G, Ades AE: Combining direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2004, 23: 3105-3124. 10.1002/sim.1875.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Higgins JPT, Jackson D, Barrett JK, Lu G, Ades AE, White IR: Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: concepts and models for multi-arm studies. Res Synth Meth. 2012, 3: 98-110. 10.1002/jrsm.1044.CrossRef Higgins JPT, Jackson D, Barrett JK, Lu G, Ades AE, White IR: Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: concepts and models for multi-arm studies. Res Synth Meth. 2012, 3: 98-110. 10.1002/jrsm.1044.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference White IR, Barrett JK, Jackson D, Higgins JPT: Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: model estimation using multivariate meta-regression. Res Synth Meth. 2012, 3: 111-125. 10.1002/jrsm.1045.CrossRef White IR, Barrett JK, Jackson D, Higgins JPT: Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: model estimation using multivariate meta-regression. Res Synth Meth. 2012, 3: 111-125. 10.1002/jrsm.1045.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Piepho HP, Williams ER, Madden LV: The use of two-way mixed models in multi-treatment meta-analysis. Biometrics. 2012, 68: 1269-1277. 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2012.01786.x.CrossRefPubMed Piepho HP, Williams ER, Madden LV: The use of two-way mixed models in multi-treatment meta-analysis. Biometrics. 2012, 68: 1269-1277. 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2012.01786.x.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Senn S, Gavini F, Magrez D, Scheen A: Issues in performing network meta-analysis. Stat Methods Med Res. 2013, 22 (2): 169-189. 10.1177/0962280211432220.CrossRefPubMed Senn S, Gavini F, Magrez D, Scheen A: Issues in performing network meta-analysis. Stat Methods Med Res. 2013, 22 (2): 169-189. 10.1177/0962280211432220.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Searle SR, Casella G, McCulloch CE: Variance Components. 1992, New York: John Wiley & SonsCrossRef Searle SR, Casella G, McCulloch CE: Variance Components. 1992, New York: John Wiley & SonsCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Wilkinson GN, Rogers CE: Symbolic description of factorial models for analysis of variance. Appl Stat. 1973, 22: 392-399. 10.2307/2346786.CrossRef Wilkinson GN, Rogers CE: Symbolic description of factorial models for analysis of variance. Appl Stat. 1973, 22: 392-399. 10.2307/2346786.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference McCullagh P, Nelder JA: Generalized Linear Models. 1989, London: Chapman & Hall, 2CrossRef McCullagh P, Nelder JA: Generalized Linear Models. 1989, London: Chapman & Hall, 2CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Piepho HP, Büchse A, Richter C: A mixed modelling approach to randomized experiments with repeated measures. J Agron Crop Sci. 2004, 190: 230-247. 10.1111/j.1439-037X.2004.00097.x.CrossRef Piepho HP, Büchse A, Richter C: A mixed modelling approach to randomized experiments with repeated measures. J Agron Crop Sci. 2004, 190: 230-247. 10.1111/j.1439-037X.2004.00097.x.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Lu G, Welton NJ, Higgins JPT, White IR, Ades AE: Linear inference for mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis: A two-stage approach. Res Synth Meth. 2011, 2: 43-60. 10.1002/jrsm.34.CrossRef Lu G, Welton NJ, Higgins JPT, White IR, Ades AE: Linear inference for mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis: A two-stage approach. Res Synth Meth. 2011, 2: 43-60. 10.1002/jrsm.34.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Möhring J, Piepho HP: Comparison of weighting in two-stage analyses of series of experiments. Crop Sci. 2009, 49: 1977-1988. 10.2135/cropsci2009.02.0083.CrossRef Möhring J, Piepho HP: Comparison of weighting in two-stage analyses of series of experiments. Crop Sci. 2009, 49: 1977-1988. 10.2135/cropsci2009.02.0083.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Piepho HP, Möhring J, Schulz-Streeck T, Ogutu JO: A stage-wise approach for analysis of multi-environment trials. Biom J. 2012, 54: 844-860. 10.1002/bimj.201100219.CrossRefPubMed Piepho HP, Möhring J, Schulz-Streeck T, Ogutu JO: A stage-wise approach for analysis of multi-environment trials. Biom J. 2012, 54: 844-860. 10.1002/bimj.201100219.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Whitehead A: Meta-Analysis of Controlled Clinical Trials. 2002, New York: Wiley & SonsCrossRef Whitehead A: Meta-Analysis of Controlled Clinical Trials. 2002, New York: Wiley & SonsCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Nelder JA: Linear models: back to basics. Stat Comput. 1994, 4: 221-234. 10.1007/BF00156745.CrossRef Nelder JA: Linear models: back to basics. Stat Comput. 1994, 4: 221-234. 10.1007/BF00156745.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Kenward MG, Roger JH: Small sample inference for fixed effects from restricted maximum likelihood. Biometrics. 1997, 53: 983-997. 10.2307/2533558.CrossRefPubMed Kenward MG, Roger JH: Small sample inference for fixed effects from restricted maximum likelihood. Biometrics. 1997, 53: 983-997. 10.2307/2533558.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Belsley DA, Kuh E, Welsch RE: Regression Diagnostics; Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity. 1980, New York: John Wiley & SonsCrossRef Belsley DA, Kuh E, Welsch RE: Regression Diagnostics; Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity. 1980, New York: John Wiley & SonsCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Cook RD, Weisberg S: Residuals and Influence in Regression. 1982, New York: Chapman and Hall Cook RD, Weisberg S: Residuals and Influence in Regression. 1982, New York: Chapman and Hall
20.
go back to reference Edwards D, Berry JJ: The efficiency of simulation-based multiple comparisons. Biometrics. 1987, 43: 913-928. 10.2307/2531545.CrossRefPubMed Edwards D, Berry JJ: The efficiency of simulation-based multiple comparisons. Biometrics. 1987, 43: 913-928. 10.2307/2531545.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Piepho HP: A SAS macro for generating letter displays of pairwise mean comparisons. Commun Biometry Crop Sci. 2012, 7: 4-13. Piepho HP: A SAS macro for generating letter displays of pairwise mean comparisons. Commun Biometry Crop Sci. 2012, 7: 4-13.
Metadata
Title
Network-meta analysis made easy: detection of inconsistency using factorial analysis-of-variance models
Author
Hans-Peter Piepho
Publication date
01-12-2014
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2014
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-14-61

Other articles of this Issue 1/2014

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2014 Go to the issue