Response to discussant comments on “NMA, the first 20 years”

A. E. Ades; Nicky J. Welton; Sofia Dias; Deborah M. Caldwell; David M. Phillippo

doi:10.1002/jrsm.1745

Response to discussant comments on “NMA, the first 20 years”

A. E. Ades^*, Nicky J. Welton, Sofia Dias, Deborah M. Caldwell, David M. Phillippo

^*Corresponding author for this work

Centre for Reviews and Dissemination

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/debate › peer-review

Abstract

We respond to discussant comments on our paper “Twenty years of network meta-analysis: Continuing controversies and recent developments” (https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1700) and raise some additional points for consideration, including: the way in which methodological guidance is generated; integration of the estimand framework with evidence synthesis; and implications of the European Joint Clinical Assessment. We ask: what properties are required of population adjustment methods to enable transparent and consistent decision-making? We also ask why individual patient data is not routinely made available to re-imbursement authorities and clinical guideline developers.

Original language	English
Number of pages	7
Journal	Research Synthesis Methods
Early online date	26 Jul 2024
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1745
Publication status	E-pub ahead of print - 26 Jul 2024

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Author(s). Research Synthesis Methods published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Keywords

decision making
estimand framework
network meta-analysis
population-adjustment
uncertainty

Access to Document

10.1002/jrsm.1745Licence: CC BY

Research Synthesis Methods - 2024 - Ades - Response to discussant comments on NMA the first 20 years
© 2024 The Author(s).
Final published version, 754 KBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{152cac7adddf49e0866e4896956569d6,

title = "Response to discussant comments on “NMA, the first 20 years”",

abstract = "We respond to discussant comments on our paper “Twenty years of network meta-analysis: Continuing controversies and recent developments” (https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1700) and raise some additional points for consideration, including: the way in which methodological guidance is generated; integration of the estimand framework with evidence synthesis; and implications of the European Joint Clinical Assessment. We ask: what properties are required of population adjustment methods to enable transparent and consistent decision-making? We also ask why individual patient data is not routinely made available to re-imbursement authorities and clinical guideline developers.",

keywords = "decision making, estimand framework, network meta-analysis, population-adjustment, uncertainty",

author = "Ades, {A. E.} and Welton, {Nicky J.} and Sofia Dias and Caldwell, {Deborah M.} and Phillippo, {David M.}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2024 The Author(s). Research Synthesis Methods published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.",

year = "2024",

month = jul,

day = "26",

doi = "10.1002/jrsm.1745",

language = "English",

journal = "Research Synthesis Methods",

issn = "1759-2879",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Response to discussant comments on “NMA, the first 20 years”

AU - Ades, A. E.

AU - Welton, Nicky J.

AU - Dias, Sofia

AU - Caldwell, Deborah M.

AU - Phillippo, David M.

PY - 2024/7/26

Y1 - 2024/7/26

N2 - We respond to discussant comments on our paper “Twenty years of network meta-analysis: Continuing controversies and recent developments” (https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1700) and raise some additional points for consideration, including: the way in which methodological guidance is generated; integration of the estimand framework with evidence synthesis; and implications of the European Joint Clinical Assessment. We ask: what properties are required of population adjustment methods to enable transparent and consistent decision-making? We also ask why individual patient data is not routinely made available to re-imbursement authorities and clinical guideline developers.

AB - We respond to discussant comments on our paper “Twenty years of network meta-analysis: Continuing controversies and recent developments” (https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1700) and raise some additional points for consideration, including: the way in which methodological guidance is generated; integration of the estimand framework with evidence synthesis; and implications of the European Joint Clinical Assessment. We ask: what properties are required of population adjustment methods to enable transparent and consistent decision-making? We also ask why individual patient data is not routinely made available to re-imbursement authorities and clinical guideline developers.

KW - decision making

KW - estimand framework

KW - network meta-analysis

KW - population-adjustment

KW - uncertainty

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85199867215&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/jrsm.1745

DO - 10.1002/jrsm.1745

M3 - Comment/debate

AN - SCOPUS:85199867215

SN - 1759-2879

JO - Research Synthesis Methods

JF - Research Synthesis Methods

ER -

Response to discussant comments on “NMA, the first 20 years”

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Cite this