Overlapping network meta‐analyses on psoriasis systemic treatments, an overview: quantity does not make quality

Guelimi, Robin; Afach, Sivem; Régnaux, J-P; Bettuzzi, Thomas; Chaby, G.; Sbidian, É.; Naudet, Florian; Cléach, L. Le

doi:10.1111/bjd.20908

Cited by 13 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is often described in the literature as redundancy and has already been observed in many fields of medical research. [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] Although investigating the same outcomes and including the same studies, these meta-analyses may differ in terms of the population of interest or the statistical methodology used, and these differences may influence their results. This phenomenon may be regarded as a 'vibration of effects' (VoE) and describes the extent to which the results of analyses could change according to the characteristics of the population included or the methodological choices made.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A framework to characterise the reproducibility of meta‐analysis results with its application to direct oral anticoagulants in the acute treatment of venous thromboembolism

Chapelle,

Le Teuff,

Zufferey

et al. 2023

Research Synthesis Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The number of meta‐analyses of aggregate data has dramatically increased due to the facility of obtaining data from publications and the development of free, easy‐to‐use, and specialised statistical software. Even when meta‐analyses include the same studies, their results may vary owing to different methodological choices. Assessment of the replication of meta‐analysis provides an example of the variation of effect ‘naturally’ observed between multiple research projects. Reproducibility of results has mostly been reported using graphical descriptive representations. A quantitative analysis of such results would enable (i) breakdown of the total observed variability with quantification of the variability generated by the replication process and (ii) identification of which variables account for this variability, such as methodological quality or the statistical analysis procedures used. These variables might explain systematic mean differences between results and dispersion of the results. To quantitatively characterise the reproducibility of meta‐analysis results, a bivariate linear mixed‐effects model was developed to simulate both mean results and their corresponding uncertainty. Results were assigned to several replication groups, those assessing the same studies, outcomes, treatment indication and comparisons classified in the same replication group. A nested random effect structure was used to break down the total variability within each replication group and between these groups to enable calculation of an intragroup correlation coefficient and quantification of reproducibility. Determinants of variability were investigated by modelling both mean and variance parameters using covariates. The proposed model was applied to the example of meta‐analyses evaluating direct oral anticoagulants in the acute treatment of venous thromboembolism.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This phenomenon has resulted in the replication of meta‐analyses, with several analyses having the same objectives and including the same studies. It is often described in the literature as redundancy and has already been observed in many fields of medical research 3–16 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A framework to characterise the reproducibility of meta‐analysis results with its application to direct oral anticoagulants in the acute treatment of venous thromboembolism

Chapelle,

Le Teuff,

Zufferey

et al. 2023

Research Synthesis Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this issue of the BJD , Guelimi et al . evaluate 47 NMAs published from 2006 to 2020 that assessed the effectiveness of systemic treatments for moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis 2 . The authors included systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials that assessed the efficacy or safety of a wide range of systemic treatments compared with placebo or another intervention.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Systemic treatments for psoriasis: not another network meta‐analysis!

Leonardi‐Bee

Drucker

2022

Br J Dermatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

Sbidian

Chaimani

García‐Doval

et al. 2022

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Overlapping network meta‐analyses on psoriasis systemic treatments, an overview: quantity does not make quality

Abstract: This study was supported by the French Society of Dermatology (Soci et e Franc ßaise de Dermatologie).

Cited by 13 publications

References 69 publications

A framework to characterise the reproducibility of meta‐analysis results with its application to direct oral anticoagulants in the acute treatment of venous thromboembolism

A framework to characterise the reproducibility of meta‐analysis results with its application to direct oral anticoagulants in the acute treatment of venous thromboembolism

Systemic treatments for psoriasis: not another network meta‐analysis!

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About