Considering multiple outcomes with different weights informed the hierarchy of interventions in network meta-analysis

Objectives: Ranking metrics in network meta-analysis (NMA) are computed separately for each outcome. Our aim is to 1) present graphical ways to group competing interventions considering multiple outcomes and 2) use conjoint analysis for placing weights on the various outcomes based on the stakeholders' preferences. Study Design and Setting: We used multidimensional scaling (MDS) and hierarchical tree clustering to visualize the extent of sim-ilarity of interventions in terms of the relative effects they produce through a random effect NMA. We reanalyzed a published network of 212 psychosis trials taking three outcomes into account as follows: reduction in symptoms of schizophrenia, all-cause treatment discon-tinuation, and weight gain.Results: Conjoint analysis provides a mathematical method to transform judgements into weights that can be subsequently used to visu-ally represent interventions on a two-dimensional plane or through a dendrogram. These plots provide insightful information about the clus-tering of interventions.Conclusion: Grouping interventions can help decision makers not only to identify the optimal ones in terms of benefit-risk balance but also choose one from the best cluster based on other grounds, such as cost, implementation etc. Placing weights on outcomes allows consid-ering patient profile or preferences.(c) 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.