期刊文献+

网状Meta分析一致性的鉴别与处理方法 被引量:65

Dif erentiation and Handling of Homogeneity in Network Meta-analysis
原文传递
导出
摘要 与传统Meta分析相比,网状Meta分析的混杂因素较多且处理更为困难。由于证据相互传递,异质性可能会被带入间接比较中。因此,异质性的有效鉴别与正确处理备受关注。为保证网状Meta分析结果的可靠性,方法学家提出一致性概念并给出一系列鉴别与处理方法。基于Bucher法的延伸,目前一致性鉴别与处理的方法已扩展至节点分析法、假设检验及两步法等十余种量化措施。然而,由于方法学基本理论与侧重点的差异以及统计效能的局限性,使得目前相关检测与处理方法的力度仍不够高效。因此,高效、简洁、解释度高的检测与处理方法依旧需要进一步探索。 Compared with traditional head to head meta-analysis, network meta-analysis has more confounding factors and difficulties to handle. Due to the mutual transitivity of evidence in network meta-analysis, heterogeneity may be brought into indirect meta-analysis. Hence, effective differentiation and correct handling of heterogeneity are being current focus. In order to ensure the reliability of the results of network meta-analysis, the concept of homogeneity is proposed and a series of methods are developed for differentiation and handling of homogeneity. Based on the extension of Bucher methods, current methods for differentiation and handling of homogeneity has extended to ten quantitative measures (eg., node analysis method, hypothesis tests, and two-step method). However, because of the differences and the focus of fundamental methodological theories as well as the limitation of statistics power, no highly-effective method has been worked out. 2-herefore, the exploration of highly-effective, simple and high-resolved methods are still needed,
出处 《中国循证医学杂志》 CSCD 2014年第7期884-888,共5页 Chinese Journal of Evidence-based Medicine
基金 国家自然科学青年基金项目(编号:81302508) 湖北省教育科学"十二五"规划2012年度重点课题(编号:2012A050) 湖北医药学院附属太和医院2013年循证医学"苗圃基金"项目(编号:EBM2013004)
关键词 网状Meta分析 一致性 异质性 证据传递 Network meta-analysis Homogeneity Heterogeneity Evidence transitivity
  • 相关文献

参考文献37

  • 1罗杰, 冷卫东, 主编. 系统评价/Meta分析理论与实践. 北京: 军事医学科学出版社, 2013.
  • 2Lumley T. Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Stat Med, 2002, 21(16): 2313-24.
  • 3曾宪涛,曹世义,孙凤,田国祥.Meta分析系列之六:间接比较及网状分析[J].中国循证心血管医学杂志,2012,4(5):399-402. 被引量:70
  • 4Veroniki AA, Vasiliadis HS, Higgins JP, et al. Evaluation of inconsistency in networks of interventions. Int J Epidemiol, 2013, 42(1): 332-345.
  • 5Jansen JP, Cope S. Meta-regression models to address heterogeneity and inconsistency in network meta-analysis of survival outcomes. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2012, 12: 152.
  • 6Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE, et al. The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol, 1997, 50(6): 683-691.
  • 7Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, et al. Evidence synthesis for decision making 4: inconsistency in networks of evidence based on randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Making, 2013, 33(5): 641-656.
  • 8Dias S, Welton NJ, Caldwell DM, et al. Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. Stat Med, 2010, 29(7-8): 932-944.
  • 9Sutton A, Ades AE, Cooper N, et al. Use of indirect and mixed treatment comparisons for technology assessment. Pharmacoeconomics, 2008, 26(9): 753-767.
  • 10Madan J, Stevenson MD, Cooper KL, et al. Consistency between direct and indirect trial evidence: is direct evidence always more reliable? Value Health, 2011, 14(6): 953-960.

二级参考文献135

  • 1邬兰,张永,曾宪涛.QUADAS-2在诊断准确性研究的质量评价工具中的应用[J].湖北医药学院学报,2013,32(3):201-208. 被引量:102
  • 2王吉耀.走出循证医学的误区[J].中华医学杂志,2004,84(12):969-970. 被引量:23
  • 3Song F,Altman DG,Glenny AM,ei al. Validity of indirect comparisonfor estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidencefrom published meta-analyses [J]. BMJ,2003,326(7387):472.
  • 4Glenny AM,Altman DG,Song F,et al. Indirect comparisons ofcompeting interventions [J]. Health Technol Assess,2005,9(26):1-134,iii-iv.
  • 5Song F,Loke YK,Walsh T,et al. Methodological problems in the use ofindirect comparisons for evaluating healthcare interventions: surveyof published systematic reviews [J]. BMJ,2009,338:b 1147.
  • 6Song F,Harvey I,Lilford R. Adjusted indirect comparison may be lessbiased than direct comparison for evaluating new pharmaceuticalinterventions [J]. J Clin Epidemiol,2008,61 (5):455-463.
  • 7Berlie HD’Kalus JS’Jaber LA. Thiazolidinediones and therisk of edema: a meta-analysis [J], Diabetes Res ClinPract,2007,76(2):279-89.
  • 8Boonen S,Lips F,Bouillon K,et al. Need for additional calcium toreduce the risk of hip fracture with vitamin d supplementation:evidence from a comparative metaanalysis of randomized controlledtrials [J]. J Clin Endocrinol Metab,2007,92(4):1415-23.
  • 9Bucher HC,Guyatt GH,Griffith LE,et al. The results of direct andindirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomizedcontrolled trials [J]. J Clin Epidemiol, 1997,50(6):683-91.
  • 10Lumley T. Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons[J]. Stat Med,2002,21(16):2313-24.

共引文献231

同被引文献1602

引证文献65

二级引证文献568

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部