Living network meta-analysis was feasible when considering the pace of evidence generation

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of the study was to assess the feasibility of living network meta-analysis (NMA) taking into account the pace of evidence generation across different medical areas.

Study design and setting: We performed a systematic review to identify published NMAs. For each NMA, we calculated the cumulative number of new trials. To assess the feasibility of living NMA, we considered different update frequencies (4, 6, and 12 months), then evaluated the number of new trials to be included at each update in the NMA and the workload percentage for an update relative to the initial NMA.

Results: We identified 77 NMAs covering 17 different medical areas; 60 (78%) had fewer than four new trials included per year, on average, and 5 (7%) had more than seven trials. With an update frequency of 4, 6, and 12 months, the median number of new trials to be included in the NMA was 0 (interquartile range, 0-1), 1 (0-2), and 2 (1-4), respectively, with mean of 4%, 5%, and 11% workload per update, respectively.

Conclusion: The workload associated with updating a living NMA represents about one-tenth of the initial workload; therefore, living NMA is manageable.

Keywords: Evidence synthesis; Live cumulative network meta-analysis; Living network meta-analysis; Living systematic review; Systematic review; Update.