Research Synthesis Methods

GetReal in network meta‐analysis: a review of the methodology

Journal Article

  • Author(s): Orestis Efthimiou, Thomas P. A. Debray, Gert Valkenhoef, Sven Trelle, Klea Panayidou, Karel G. M. Moons, Johannes B. Reitsma, Aijing Shang, Georgia Salanti, 
  • Article first published online: 11 Jan 2016
  • DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1195
  • Read on Online Library
  • Subscribe to Journal

Pairwise meta‐analysis is an established statistical tool for synthesizing evidence from multiple trials, but it is informative only about the relative efficacy of two specific interventions. The usefulness of pairwise meta‐analysis is thus limited in real‐life medical practice, where many competing interventions may be available for a certain condition and studies informing some of the pairwise comparisons may be lacking. This commonly encountered scenario has led to the development of network meta‐analysis (NMA). In the last decade, several applications, methodological developments, and empirical studies in NMA have been published, and the area is thriving as its relevance to public health is increasingly recognized. This article presents a review of the relevant literature on NMA methodology aiming to pinpoint the developments that have appeared in the field. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Related Topics

Related Publications

Related Content

Site Footer


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 are checked for statistical accuracy by a panel from the European Network for Business and Industrial Statistics (ENBIS)   to whom Wiley and 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.