Como interpretar una revisión sistemática con comparaciones múltiples o network metaanálisis
Systematic reviews evaluating multiple interventions can be useful in different clinical situations. However, some concerns arise when more than two interventions are compared and there is a paucity of good quality randomized clinical trials. A novel statistical method based on indirect comparisons,...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Lenguaje: | Spanish / Castilian |
| Publicado: |
Sociedad Médica de Santiago
2020
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | http://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-98872020000100109 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | Systematic reviews evaluating multiple interventions can be useful in different clinical situations. However, some concerns arise when more than two interventions are compared and there is a paucity of good quality randomized clinical trials. A novel statistical method based on indirect comparisons, called network meta-analysis (NMA), can be a useful approach to find a clinical answer when multiple interventions are evaluated for the same outcome or comparator. The aim of this review is to describe the main characteristics and provide a user guide for a critical analysis of NMA focusing on its three main domains, namely homogeneity, transitivity and consistency. |
|---|