Using network meta-analysis to predict the percentage of missing participants for a future trial

L. Spineli
{"title":"Using network meta-analysis to predict the percentage of missing participants for a future trial","authors":"L. Spineli","doi":"10.1177/26320843231167502","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Using evidence synthesis to design a clinical trial has long been advocated as the key against research waste. However, the relevant methodology does not deal with possible missing participants (MP) that may occur in a future trial. We illustrated the synergism of the baseline effects model and network meta-analysis (NMA) to predict the percentage of MP for a future trial. Methods We considered the network of a published systematic review as a case study. We applied the baseline effects model, followed by the relative effects model using Bayesian methods to predict the percentage of MP in each intervention when conducting NMA and a series of pairwise meta-analyses. We illustrated the posterior distribution of the predicted percentage MP under both synthesis methods alongside the MP reported in the corresponding trials for each intervention. Results Selecting different interventions for the baseline effects model yielded different predicted baseline effects and led to different predicted percentages of MP for the remaining interventions, highlighting the need to carefully pre-specifying the intervention for the baseline effects model. Both synthesis methods provided almost identical posterior distributions of predicted percentage MP for estimating similar summary odds ratios. There was great variability in the percentage of MP across the trials for each intervention, manifesting as considerable variability in the percentage difference in MP compared to NMA. Conclusions Incorporating predictions and absolute effects in the context of MP in NMA aids in determining the anticipated percentage of MP in the compared interventions to plan a future trial efficiently.","PeriodicalId":74683,"journal":{"name":"Research methods in medicine & health sciences","volume":"4 1","pages":"140 - 149"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research methods in medicine & health sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26320843231167502","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Using evidence synthesis to design a clinical trial has long been advocated as the key against research waste. However, the relevant methodology does not deal with possible missing participants (MP) that may occur in a future trial. We illustrated the synergism of the baseline effects model and network meta-analysis (NMA) to predict the percentage of MP for a future trial. Methods We considered the network of a published systematic review as a case study. We applied the baseline effects model, followed by the relative effects model using Bayesian methods to predict the percentage of MP in each intervention when conducting NMA and a series of pairwise meta-analyses. We illustrated the posterior distribution of the predicted percentage MP under both synthesis methods alongside the MP reported in the corresponding trials for each intervention. Results Selecting different interventions for the baseline effects model yielded different predicted baseline effects and led to different predicted percentages of MP for the remaining interventions, highlighting the need to carefully pre-specifying the intervention for the baseline effects model. Both synthesis methods provided almost identical posterior distributions of predicted percentage MP for estimating similar summary odds ratios. There was great variability in the percentage of MP across the trials for each intervention, manifesting as considerable variability in the percentage difference in MP compared to NMA. Conclusions Incorporating predictions and absolute effects in the context of MP in NMA aids in determining the anticipated percentage of MP in the compared interventions to plan a future trial efficiently.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用网络荟萃分析预测未来试验中失踪参与者的百分比
长期以来,利用证据综合来设计临床试验一直被认为是防止研究浪费的关键。然而,相关的方法并没有处理在未来的试验中可能出现的缺失参与者(MP)。我们说明了基线效应模型和网络荟萃分析(NMA)的协同作用,以预测未来试验的MP百分比。方法我们将一篇已发表的系统综述网络作为案例研究。我们采用基线效应模型,然后采用贝叶斯方法建立相对效应模型,在进行NMA和一系列两两荟萃分析时预测每次干预中MP的百分比。我们展示了两种合成方法下预测的MP百分比的后验分布,以及每种干预措施的相应试验中报告的MP。结果为基线效应模型选择不同的干预措施会产生不同的预测基线效应,并导致剩余干预措施的MP预测百分比不同,这突出了需要仔细预先指定基线效应模型的干预措施。两种合成方法提供了几乎相同的预测百分比MP后验分布,用于估计相似的汇总优势比。在每个干预的试验中,MP的百分比有很大的可变性,与NMA相比,MP的百分比差异有很大的可变性。结论:在NMA中纳入MP背景下的预测和绝对效应有助于确定在比较干预措施中MP的预期百分比,从而有效地计划未来的试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Choice of Link Functions for Generalized Linear Mixed Models in Meta-Analyses of Proportions. Disclosure of suicidal ideation in non-psychiatric clinical research: Experience using a novel suicide risk management algorithm in a multi-center smoking cessation trial Dynamic relationship among immediate release fentanyl use and cancer incidence: A multivariate time-series analysis using vector autoregressive models Monitoring metrics over time: Why clinical trialists need to systematically collect site performance metrics. Editorial
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1