Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 4 IPD NMA ANCOVA synthesis model (model 2) results with adjustments, EQ-5D preference endpoint

From: Methods for network meta-analysis of continuous outcomes using individual patient data: a case study in acupuncture for chronic pain

IPD NMA results: EQ-5D preference scores endpointa Model 2, ANCOVA, with adjustment for baseline score, age and treatment-by-age interactions, median MCMC posterior sample (95 % CrI)
Relative treatment effects Osteoarthritis of the knee SHAM vs UC 0.040 (-0.006, 0.084)
ACU vs UC 0.066 (0.025, 0.105)
ACU vs SHAM 0.026 (-0.012, 0.066)
Headache SHAM vs UC 0.056 (0.012, 0.098)
ACU vs UC 0.060 (0.023, 0.095)
ACU vs SHAM 0.004 (-0.036, 0.043)
Musculoskeletal SHAM vs UC 0.045 (-0.001, 0.094)
ACU vs UC 0.074 (0.038, 0.109)
ACU vs SHAM 0.029 (-0.009, 0.067)
Main effects Age -0.002 (-0.002, -0.001)
Age 2 0.000 (0.000, 0.000)
Age common interactions Age 0.000 (0.000, 0.001)
Age 2 0.000 (0.000, 0.000)
  Between-study variance 0.001 (0.000,0.003)
Total residual deviance b 15,590 (15,210; 15,970)
Deviance information criterion c -6,462.0
  1. aUC usual care, SHAM sham acupuncture, ACU acupuncture, Headache group headache, migraine and TTH, Musculoskeletal group neck, shoulder and low back pain
  2. bCompare to approx. 14, 800 observations
  3. cDeviance information criterion (DIC) is a statistical measure of model fit and model comparison. Models should be preferred with smaller DIC