» Articles » PMID: 26220535

Bayesian Hierarchical Models for Network Meta-analysis Incorporating Nonignorable Missingness

Overview
Publisher Sage Publications
Specialties Public Health
Science
Date 2015 Jul 30
PMID 26220535
Citations 19
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Network meta-analysis expands the scope of a conventional pairwise meta-analysis to simultaneously compare multiple treatments, synthesizing both direct and indirect information and thus strengthening inference. Since most of trials only compare two treatments, a typical data set in a network meta-analysis managed as a trial-by-treatment matrix is extremely sparse, like an incomplete block structure with significant missing data. Zhang et al. proposed an arm-based method accounting for correlations among different treatments within the same trial and assuming that absent arms are missing at random. However, in randomized controlled trials, nonignorable missingness or missingness not at random may occur due to deliberate choices of treatments at the design stage. In addition, those undertaking a network meta-analysis may selectively choose treatments to include in the analysis, which may also lead to missingness not at random. In this paper, we extend our previous work to incorporate missingness not at random using selection models. The proposed method is then applied to two network meta-analyses and evaluated through extensive simulation studies. We also provide comprehensive comparisons of a commonly used contrast-based method and the arm-based method via simulations in a technical appendix under missing completely at random and missing at random.

Citing Articles

Choice of Link Functions for Generalized Linear Mixed Models in Meta-Analyses of Proportions.

Siegel L, Silva M, Lin L, Chen Y, Liu Y, Chu H Res Methods Med Health Sci. 2024; 6(1):13-23.

PMID: 39668973 PMC: 11632795. DOI: 10.1177/26320843231224808.


A review and comparison of arm-based versus contrast-based network meta-analysis for binary outcomes-Understanding their differences and limitations.

Chu H, Lin L, Wang Z, Wang Z, Chen Y, Cappelleri J Wiley Interdiscip Rev Comput Stat. 2024; 16(1).

PMID: 38818353 PMC: 11134325. DOI: 10.1002/wics.1639.


Bayesian hierarchical model-based network meta-analysis to overcome survival extrapolation challenges caused by data immaturity.

Heeg B, Verhoek A, Tremblay G, Harari O, Soltanifar M, Chu H J Comp Eff Res. 2023; 12(3):e220159.

PMID: 36651607 PMC: 10288968. DOI: 10.2217/cer-2022-0159.


BRIDGING RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AND SINGLE-ARM TRIALS USING COMMENSURATE PRIORS IN ARM-BASED NETWORK META-ANALYSIS.

Wang Z, Lin L, Murray T, Hodges J, Chu H Ann Appl Stat. 2022; 15(4):1767-1787.

PMID: 36032933 PMC: 9417056. DOI: 10.1214/21-aoas1469.


A Bayesian Hierarchical CACE Model Accounting for Incomplete Noncompliance With Application to a Meta-analysis of Epidural Analgesia on Cesarean Section.

Zhou J, Hodges J, Chu H J Am Stat Assoc. 2022; 116(536):1700-1712.

PMID: 35261417 PMC: 8901124. DOI: 10.1080/01621459.2021.1900859.


References
1.
Shuster J, Jones L, Salmon D . Fixed vs random effects meta-analysis in rare event studies: the rosiglitazone link with myocardial infarction and cardiac death. Stat Med. 2007; 26(24):4375-85. DOI: 10.1002/sim.3060. View

2.
van Houwelingen H, Zwinderman K, Stijnen T . A bivariate approach to meta-analysis. Stat Med. 1993; 12(24):2273-84. DOI: 10.1002/sim.4780122405. View

3.
Picard P, Tramer M . Prevention of pain on injection with propofol: a quantitative systematic review. Anesth Analg. 2000; 90(4):963-9. DOI: 10.1097/00000539-200004000-00035. View

4.
Gustafson P . The utility of prior information and stratification for parameter estimation with two screening tests but no gold standard. Stat Med. 2004; 24(8):1203-17. DOI: 10.1002/sim.2002. View

5.
Hasselblad V . Meta-analysis of multitreatment studies. Med Decis Making. 1998; 18(1):37-43. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9801800110. View