权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Calibration of multiple treatment comparisons using individual patient data

使用个体患者数据校准多种治疗比较

基本信息

批准号：
MR/P015298/1
负责人：
Nicky Welton
金额：
$ 39.94万
依托单位：
University of Bristol
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Research Grant
财政年份：
2017
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2017 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=MR%2FP015298%2F1
关键词：
Calibration multiple treatment comparisons using

项目摘要

There are well established methods for comparing multiple treatments based on a synthesis of all the trials that compare any two or more of them. These "network meta-analysis" methods are routinely used in NICE appraisals, NICE Clinical Guidelines, health technology assessment in general, and with growing frequency in Cochrane Collaboration reviews. These methods do, however, assume that the distribution of effect modifiers is the same in the included trials. Such assumptions are difficult to verify, but if they are not met results are likely to be biased. As a result, there has been recent interest in methods that appear to address these concerns by using IPD from one trial to adjust the between-treatment comparisons. These methods are being seen with increasing frequency in the applied health technology assessment literature, and also in submissions to NICE. They are particularly attractive to manufacturers, who have access to IPD from their own trials but not to trials on competitor products. The methods that have been published have limited scope, and their reliability has not been assessed. Of still greater concern is that they are also being applied to non-randomised (one-arm) studies: this is a radical departure from standard practice because it makes assumptions that have always been regarded as implausible.Using simulation studies, and real examples from industry partners, we propose to develop and evaluate new methods that can use IPD from one or more trials to adjust treatment comparisons across an entire network of comparisons, and to provide improved comparative effectiveness estimates that are relevant to any specified target population. We will assess and compare the reliability of or the methods we plan to develop with standard methods, and with the methods now appearing in the literature, and we will check the validity of the various assumptions made by the different methods, using real data.

有完善的方法比较多个治疗的基础上，综合所有的试验，比较任何两个或两个以上的他们。这些“网络荟萃分析”方法通常用于NICE评价、NICE临床指南、一般卫生技术评估，并且在科克伦协作评价中使用频率越来越高。然而，这些方法确实假设效应调节剂的分布在纳入的试验中是相同的。这些假设很难验证，但如果不符合这些假设，结果可能会有偏差。因此，最近人们对似乎可以通过使用一项试验的IPD来调整治疗间比较来解决这些问题的方法产生了兴趣。这些方法在应用卫生技术评估文献和向NICE提交的文件中越来越频繁地出现。它们对制造商特别有吸引力，因为制造商可以通过自己的试验获得IPD，但无法获得竞争对手产品的试验。已公布的方法范围有限，其可靠性尚未得到评估。更令人担忧的是，它们也被应用于非随机（单组）研究：这是一个彻底背离标准做法，因为它作出的假设一直被认为是不可信的。使用模拟研究，和真实的例子，从行业合作伙伴，我们建议开发和评估新的方法，可以使用一个或多个试验的IPD来调整整个网络的治疗比较，比较，并提供与任何特定目标人群相关的改进的比较有效性估计数。我们将评估和比较我们计划开发的方法与标准方法的可靠性，以及与文献中出现的方法的可靠性，我们将使用真实的数据检查不同方法所做的各种假设的有效性。

项目成果

期刊论文数量（10）

专著数量（0）

科研奖励数量（0）

会议论文数量（0）

专利数量（0）

Resistance training prescription for muscle strength and hypertrophy in healthy adults: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

DOI：
10.1136/bjsports-2023-106807
发表时间：
2023-09
期刊：
BRITISH JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE
影响因子：
18.4
作者：
Currier, Brad S.;Mcleod, Jonathan C.;Banfield, Laura;Beyene, Joseph;Welton, Nicky J.;D'Souza, Alysha C.;Keogh, Joshua A. J.;Lin, Lydia;Coletta, Giulia;Yang, Antony;Colenso-Semple, Lauren;Lau, Kyle J.;Verboom, Alexandria;Phillips, Stuart M.
通讯作者：
Phillips, Stuart M.

Comorbidity and health-related quality of life in people with a chronic medical condition in randomised clinical trials: An individual participant data meta-analysis.