Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Dec;10(4):569-581.
doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1373. Epub 2019 Oct 11.

MetaInsight: An interactive web-based tool for analyzing, interrogating, and visualizing network meta-analyses using R-shiny and netmeta

Rhiannon K Owen  1 , Naomi Bradbury  2 , Yiqiao Xin  3 , Nicola Cooper  1 , Alex Sutton  1
Affiliations

MetaInsight: An interactive web-based tool for analyzing, interrogating, and visualizing network meta-analyses using R-shiny and netmeta

Rhiannon K Owen et al. Res Synth Methods. 2019 Dec.

Abstract

Background: Network meta-analysis (NMA) is a powerful analysis method used to identify the best treatments for a condition and is used extensively by health care decision makers. Although software routines exist for conducting NMA, they require considerable statistical programming expertise to use, which limits the number of researchers able to conduct such analyses.

Objectives: To develop a web-based tool allowing users with only standard internet browser software to be able to conduct NMAs using an intuitive "point and click" interface and present the results using visual plots.

Methods: Using the existing netmeta and Shiny packages for R to conduct the analyses, and to develop the user interface, we created the MetaInsight tool which is freely available to use via the web.

Results: A package was created for conducting NMA which satisfied our objectives, and this is described, and its application demonstrated, using an illustrative example.

Conclusions: We believe that many researchers will find our package helpful for facilitating NMA as well as allowing decision makers to scrutinize presented results visually and in real time. This will impact on the relevance of statistical analyses for health care decision making and sustainably increase capacity by empowering informed nonspecialists to be able to conduct more clinically relevant reviews. It is also hoped that others will be inspired to create similar tools for other advanced specialist analyses methods using the freely available technologies we have adopted.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The author reported no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Network plot illustrating the network of treatment comparisons [Colour figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Figure 2
Figure 2
Screenshot of the data entry for continuous data with preloaded example data in long format [Colour figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Figure 3
Figure 3
Screenshot of NMA options for continuous data
Figure 4
Figure 4
Forest plot of individual study results grouped by treatment comparison. The measure of effect is mean difference with corresponding 95% confidence intervals [Colour figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Figure 5
Figure 5
Forest plot [Colour figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Figure 6
Figure 6
Comparison plot [Colour figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Figure 7
Figure 7
Assessment of inconsistency [Colour figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Figure 8
Figure 8
Screenshot of the checkbox input for sensitivity analyses
Figure 9
Figure 9
Network plots illustrating the network of treatment comparisons after excluding studies to the left and the network plot including all studies to the right [Colour figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Figure 10
Figure 10
Forest plot [Colour figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Figure 11
Figure 11
Comparison plot [Colour figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Jansen JP, Fleurence R, Devine B, et al. Interpreting indirect treatment comparisons and network meta‐analysis for health‐care decision making: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 1. Value Health. 2011;14(4):417‐428. - PubMed
    1. Lumley T. Network meta‐analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2002;21(16):2313‐2324. - PubMed
    1. Lu G, Ades A. Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2004;23(20):3105‐3124. 10.1002/sim.1875 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Caldwell DM, Ades AE, Higgins JP. Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence. BMJ. 2005;331(7521):897‐900. 10.1136/bmj.331.7521.897 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lunn DJ, Thomas A, Best N, Spiegelhalter D. WinBUGS—a Bayesian modelling framework: concepts, structure, and extensibility. Stat Comput. 2000;10(4):325‐337.

LinkOut - more resources