An alternative parameterization of Bayesian logistic hierarchical models for mixed treatment comparisons

被引:3
|
作者
Pechlivanoglou, Petros [1 ,2 ]
Abegaz, Fentaw [3 ]
Postma, Maarten J. [2 ]
Wit, Ernst [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Toronto, Toronto Hlth Econ & Technol Assessment THETA Coll, Toronto, ON, Canada
[2] Univ Groningen, Dept Pharm, Unit Pharmacoepidemiol & Pharmacoecon, NL-9713 AV Groningen, Netherlands
[3] Univ Groningen, Johann Bernoulli Inst Math & Comp Sci, Nijenborgh 9, NL-9747 AG Groningen, Netherlands
关键词
Bayesian inference; mixed treatments comparison; meta-analysis; NETWORK METAANALYSIS; CLINICAL-TRIALS; DRUG;
D O I
10.1002/pst.1688
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
Mixed treatment comparison (MTC) models rely on estimates of relative effectiveness from randomized clinical trials so as to respect randomization across treatment arms. This approach could potentially be simplified by an alternative parameterization of the way effectiveness is modeled. We introduce a treatment-based parameterization of the MTC model that estimates outcomes on both the study and treatment levels. We compare the proposed model to the commonly used MTC models using a simulation study as well as three randomized clinical trial datasets from published systematic reviews comparing (i) treatments on bleeding after cirrhosis, (ii) the impact of antihypertensive drugs in diabetes mellitus, and (iii) smoking cessation strategies. The simulation results suggest similar or sometimes better performance of the treatment-based MTC model. Moreover, from the real data analyses, little differences were observed on the inference extracted from both models. Overall, our proposed MTC approach performed as good, or better, than the commonly applied indirect and MTC models and is simpler, fast, and easier to implement in standard statistical software. Copyright (c) 2015John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:322 / 331
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] Methods used to conduct and report Bayesian mixed treatment comparisons published in the medical literature: a systematic review
    Sobieraj, Diana M.
    Cappelleri, Joseph C.
    Baker, William L.
    Phung, Olivia J.
    White, C. Michael
    Coleman, Craig I.
    BMJ OPEN, 2013, 3 (07):
  • [12] Bayesian inference of the cumulative logistic principal component regression models
    Kyung, Minjung
    COMMUNICATIONS FOR STATISTICAL APPLICATIONS AND METHODS, 2022, 29 (02) : 203 - 223
  • [13] Borrowing strength and borrowing index for Bayesian hierarchical models
    Xu, Ganggang
    Zhu, Huirong
    Lee, J. Jack
    COMPUTATIONAL STATISTICS & DATA ANALYSIS, 2020, 144
  • [14] Bayesian hierarchical models for adaptive basket trial designs
    Chen, Chian
    Hsiao, Chin-Fu
    PHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS, 2023, 22 (03) : 531 - 546
  • [15] Inversion of hierarchical Bayesian models using Gaussian processes
    Lomakina, Ekaterina I.
    Paliwal, Saee
    Diaconescu, Andreea O.
    Brodersen, Kay H.
    Aponte, Eduardo A.
    Buhmann, Joachim M.
    Stephan, Klaas E.
    NEUROIMAGE, 2015, 118 : 133 - 145
  • [16] Genetic algorithms for the analysis of Bayesian hierarchical partition models
    Borroni C.G.
    Piccarreta R.
    Statistical Methods and Applications, 2001, 10 (1-3) : 113 - 121
  • [17] Bayesian analysis for a class of beta mixed models
    Bonat, Wagner Hugo
    Ribeiro, Paulo Justiniano, Jr.
    Shimakura, Silvia Emiko
    CHILEAN JOURNAL OF STATISTICS, 2015, 6 (01): : 3 - 13
  • [18] Identifying Potential Adverse Events Dose-Response Relationships Via Bayesian Indirect and Mixed Treatment Comparison Models
    Fu, Haoda
    Price, Karen L.
    Nilsson, Mary E.
    Ruberg, Stephen J.
    JOURNAL OF BIOPHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS, 2013, 23 (01) : 26 - 42
  • [19] Interventions for humeral shaft fractures: mixed treatment comparisons of clinical trials
    Zhao, Y.
    Wang, J.
    Yao, W.
    Cai, Q.
    Wang, Y.
    Yuan, W.
    Gao, S.
    OSTEOPOROSIS INTERNATIONAL, 2017, 28 (11) : 3229 - 3237
  • [20] Mixed treatment comparisons using aggregate and individual participant level data
    Saramago, Pedro
    Sutton, Alex J.
    Cooper, Nicola J.
    Manca, Andrea
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2012, 31 (28) : 3516 - 3536