• 1. Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, P. R. China;
  • 2. Key Laboratory of Evidence-based Medicine of Gansu Province, Lanzhou 730000, P. R. China;
  • 3. School of Nursing, Gansu University of Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou 730000, P. R. China;
  • 4. The Second Clinical Medical College of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, P. R. China;
  • 5. Department of Nursing, the Second Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730030;
  • 6. School of Nursing, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, P. R. China;
SHANG Yi, Email: 1208299573@qq.com; TIAN Jinhui, Email: tjh996@163.com
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have become the cornerstone methodologies for integrating multi-source research data and enhancing the quality of evidence. Traditional meta-analyses often demonstrate limitations when handling multiple treatment options. Network meta-analysis (NMA) overcomes these limitations by constructing a network of evidence that encompasses various treatment options, allowing for the simultaneous comparison of both direct and indirect evidence across multiple treatment plans. This provides more comprehensive and precise support for clinical decision-making. This article comprehensively reviews the statistical principles of NMA, its three fundamental assumptions, and the statistical inference framework. It also critically analyzes the mainstream NMA software and packages currently available, such as R (including gemtc, netmeta, rjags, pcnetmeta), Stata (mvmeta, network), WinBUGS, SAS, ADDIS, and various online applications, highlighting their strengths, weaknesses, and suitable scenarios. This analysis provides researchers with a scientific and unified framework for conducting clinical studies and policy-making.

Copyright © the editorial department of Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine of West China Medical Publisher. All rights reserved