Table 4 Characteristics of studies assessing quality of NMAs (n = 6)
First author, year of publication | Title | Objective | Research institute | Country of the first author | Name of the tools used | Type of assessment | Assessed effectiveness, efficacy and/or safety | Clinical focus | Methods used to develop the study | Authors’ conclusions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bafeta 2014 [64] | Reporting of results from network meta-analyses: methodological systematic review | Examine how network meta-analysis results are reported | Hôpital Hôtel-Dieu | France | NICE DSU and ISPOR | Reporting | Effectiveness, efficacy, and safety | NA | Meta-research study of NMAs | NMAs are heterogeneously reported. Development of reporting guidelines for critically appraising reports of NMAs is timely |
Donegan 2010 [66] | Indirect comparisons: a review of reporting and methodological quality | Report a systematic review of the reporting and methodological quality of published indirect comparisons using specifically devised quality assessment criteria | University of Liverpool | UK | Not reported | Methodological quality | Effectiveness | NA | Meta-research study of NMAs | The underlying assumptions are not routinely explored or reported when undertaking indirect comparisons. We recommend that the quality should be improved by assessing assumptions and reporting the assessment methods applied |
Dotson 2019 [37] | Rising placebo response rates threaten the validity of antipsychotic meta-analyses | Evaluate if NMAs display evidence of a confounding bias that varies with time | University of Liverpool | USA | Not reported | Risk of bias | Efficacy | Anti-psychotics/anti-depressants | Meta-research study of NMAs | Rankings of antipsychotics, but not antidepressants, show evidence of a confounding temporal bias. Poorly compensated placebo inflation is one potential explanation for this finding |
Fleetwood 2016 [63] | A Review of the Use of Network Meta-Analysis In Nice Single Technology Appraisals | Evaluate the use of NMA within Single Technology Appraisals (STAs) with respect to the NICE guidance | Quantics Consulting Ltd | UK | NICE DSU | Reporting and methodological quality | Effectiveness | NA | Meta-research study of NMAs | Although STAs often include NMAs, these do not always entirely conform to the NICE guidelines. Manufacturers should present all of the information recommended by the NICE guidelines |
Thieffry 2020 [65] | Understanding the challenge of comparative effectiveness research in focal epilepsy: A review of network meta-analyses and real-world evidence on antiepileptic drugs (AED) | Building on previous assessments of NMAs of AEDs as adjunctive treatment of focal seizures, we review the meth-odological quality and robustness of recent NMAs | UCB Pharma | Belgium | NICE DSU, ISPOR | Methodological quality | Efficacy, safety | Focal seizures | Meta-research study of NMAs | Current NMAs provide only nominal comparative evidence for AED treatments and should be used with caution for decision-making due to their methodological limitations |
| Â | Â | Â | Federal University of Parana | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â |
Tonin 2018 [62] | Mapping the characteristics of network meta-analyses on drug therapy: A systematic review | Our aim was to map the characteristics of all the NMAs published, including drug therapy comparisons | Federal University of Parana | Brazil | PRISMA NMA | Reporting and methodological quality | Not reported | Drug therapy comparisons | Meta-research study of NMAs | The map can gather NMA evidence, but it also identified some weaknesses, especially in the report, which limits its transparency and reproducibility |