Skip to main content

Table 1 Overview of simulated scenarios

From: A simulation study to compare different estimation approaches for network meta-analysis and corresponding methods to evaluate the consistency assumption

Networks (interventions, direct comparisons)
Network (a) (A, B, C), 3
Network (b) (A, B, C, D), 5
Network (c) (A, B, C, D, E), 7
Network (d) (A, B, C, D, E), 9
Network (e) (A, B, C, D, E), 9, additional inconsistency for comparison D vs. E
Inconsistency (\(\text {OR}_{BC}^{incon} = \text {OR}_{BC} \times \text {ROR}_{BC}\))
No inconsistency RORBC=1
Moderate inconsistency RORBC=0.8
Severe inconsistency RORBC=0.6
Heterogeneity
Very low heterogeneity τ2=0.01
Low heterogeneity τ2=0.1
Direct studies per pairwise comparison k=5
Patients per study arm n=100
True treatment effects ORAB=…=ORDE=1.0
Baseline probability pA=0.1
Replications R=1000