Research Synthesis Methods

Accounting for correlation in network meta‐analysis with multi‐arm trials

Journal Article

Multi‐arm trials (trials with more than two arms) are particularly valuable forms of evidence for network meta‐analysis (NMA). Trial results are available either as arm‐level summaries, where effect measures are reported for each arm, or as contrast‐level summaries, where the differences in effect between arms compare with the control arm chosen for the trial. We show that likelihood‐based inference in both contrast‐level and arm‐level formats is identical if there are only two‐arm trials, but that if there are multi‐arm trials, results from the contrast‐level format will be incorrect unless correlations are accounted for in the likelihood. We review Bayesian and frequentist software for NMA with multi‐arm trials that can account for this correlation and give an illustrative example of the difference in estimates that can be introduced if the correlations are not incorporated. We discuss methods of imputing correlations when they cannot be derived from the reported results and urge trialists to report the standard error for the control arm even if only contrast‐level summaries are reported. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Related Topics

Related Publications

Related Content

Site Footer

Address:

This website is provided by John Wiley & Sons Limited, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex PO19 8SQ (Company No: 00641132, VAT No: 376766987)

Published features on StatisticsViews.com are checked for statistical accuracy by a panel from the European Network for Business and Industrial Statistics (ENBIS)   to whom Wiley and StatisticsViews.com express their gratitude. This panel are: Ron Kenett, David Steinberg, Shirley Coleman, Irena Ograjenšek, Fabrizio Ruggeri, Rainer Göb, Philippe Castagliola, Xavier Tort-Martorell, Bart De Ketelaere, Antonio Pievatolo, Martina Vandebroek, Lance Mitchell, Gilbert Saporta, Helmut Waldl and Stelios Psarakis.