IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1003082.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

CINeMA: An approach for assessing confidence in the results of a network meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Adriani Nikolakopoulou
  • Julian P T Higgins
  • Theodoros Papakonstantinou
  • Anna Chaimani
  • Cinzia Del Giovane
  • Matthias Egger
  • Georgia Salanti

Abstract

Background: The evaluation of the credibility of results from a meta-analysis has become an important part of the evidence synthesis process. We present a methodological framework to evaluate confidence in the results from network meta-analyses, Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA), when multiple interventions are compared. Methodology: CINeMA considers 6 domains: (i) within-study bias, (ii) reporting bias, (iii) indirectness, (iv) imprecision, (v) heterogeneity, and (vi) incoherence. Key to judgments about within-study bias and indirectness is the percentage contribution matrix, which shows how much information each study contributes to the results from network meta-analysis. The contribution matrix can easily be computed using a freely available web application. In evaluating imprecision, heterogeneity, and incoherence, we consider the impact of these components of variability in forming clinical decisions. Conclusions: Via 3 examples, we show that CINeMA improves transparency and avoids the selective use of evidence when forming judgments, thus limiting subjectivity in the process. CINeMA is easy to apply even in large and complicated networks. Adriani Nikolakopoulou and co-authors discuss CINeMA, an approach for evaluating the findings of network meta-analyses.

Suggested Citation

  • Adriani Nikolakopoulou & Julian P T Higgins & Theodoros Papakonstantinou & Anna Chaimani & Cinzia Del Giovane & Matthias Egger & Georgia Salanti, 2020. "CINeMA: An approach for assessing confidence in the results of a network meta-analysis," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(4), pages 1-19, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1003082
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003082
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003082
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003082&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003082?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jesse Elliott & Amy Johnston & Don Husereau & Shannon E Kelly & Caroline Eagles & Alice Charach & Shu-Ching Hsieh & Zemin Bai & Alomgir Hossain & Becky Skidmore & Eva Tsakonas & Dagmara Chojecki & Muh, 2020. "Pharmacologic treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-35, October.
    2. Jihoon Lim & Imen Farhat & Antonios Douros & Dimitra Panagiotoglou, 2022. "Relative effectiveness of medications for opioid-related disorders: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-30, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1003082. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.