Evidence-Based Decision Making in Psychological Research: A Network Meta-Analysis

IntroductionNetwork meta-analysis (NMA) was introduced in the 1990s as an extension of standard meta-analysis. Since then, it has been utilized in various scientific fields, particularly in medicine, to evaluate the effectiveness of therapies/interventions/treatments applied for specific outcomes. In recent years, NMA, which offers a highly attractive methodology for researchers, clinicians and decision-makers, has gained popularity as a form of evidence synthesis. Recognized as providing the 'highest level of evidence', NMA is also crucial in conducting research in psychology and psychiatry. With advancements in psychology and psychiatry, specific programmes or interventions have been developed and continue to be developed to address particular problem areas. Due to the variety of these treatment methods, there has not yet been a study focusing on the direct comparison of some treatments. Therefore, the aim of this article is to introduce the NMA method and highlight its potential in evidence-based decision-making, particularly in the field of psychopathology. By doing so, it is anticipated that the perspective of clinicians can be broadened in planning appropriate therapies for psychopathologies.MethodsThe article was written as a comprehensive review using certain keywords.ResultsConsequently, it becomes challenging for decision-makers, clinicians, or researchers to determine the best treatments for a specific outcome. At this point, NMA offers the opportunity to analyze direct and indirect comparisons of various treatments applied in psychology within a single analysis, thus holding great potential for researchers and practitioners. Despite this potential, NMA has not received sufficient attention from researchers in this field.ConclusionIn conclusion, NMA holds significant potential for use in psychology, where many treatment options exist, and its use is encouraged among clinicians and researchers in the field.