Update of PRISMA guidelines for network meta-analyses

Oral
2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
Catalá-López F1, Dourka J2, Franco J3, Hutton B4, Konstantinidis M5, Li T6, McKenzie J7, Smith M8, Stevens A9, Straus S5, Thirugnanasampanthar S2, Tovey D10, Tricco A5, Veroniki A5, Warren R2, Wells G11
1Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Institute of Health Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
2Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
3Medical Faculty of the Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; BMJ Evidence Based Medicine, London, United Kingdom
4Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
5Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
6University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colorado, United States; Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
7Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
8Cochrane Consumer Network Executive
9Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
10Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, Sussex, United Kingdom
11University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Background:

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), introduced in 2009, enhances transparency and reproducibility in systematic reviews with pairwise meta-analysis of health care interventions. PRISMA was updated in 2020 to reflect advances in the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The 2015 PRISMA extension for network meta-analysis (NMA) does not include relevant content and structure to the PRISMA 2020 and does not address NMA methodological advances, including modeling complex interventions, dose effects, missing data, transitivity, and certainty of evidence.

Objectives:

To generate items for potential inclusion in the PRISMA reporting guideline for systematic reviews incorporating NMA. We aim to update PRISMA-NMA.

Methods:

Following JBI guidance and based on a previous scoping review, an experienced librarian developed a new literature search, which was peer reviewed by a second librarian using PRESS (Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies), to identify possible reporting items. We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Methodology Register, Embase, and ERIC databases from inception to December 13, 2023. We searched for unpublished studies and scanned references within included studies for additional relevant studies. We included any study design that evaluated reporting completeness or offered reporting or quality assessment guidance of NMAs. Screening and data abstraction are conducted by 2 researchers independently. Disagreements are resolved by another researcher. We will omit duplicate items and group similar items into categories. Sources of unique items will be counted and study characteristics will be summarized in tables and figures. Reporting will follow the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews.

Results:

Our search identified 2,096 potentially relevant studies for the PRISMA-NMA scoping review. Following title and abstract screening, 145 studies met the eligibility criteria, which are being screened against the eligibility criteria. We will present identified items and our patient and public involvement strategy at the conference.

Conclusions:

The identified items will underpin the next steps in updating the PRISMA-NMA extension. Next steps include conducting a modified Delphi survey, virtual consensus meeting on the Delphi findings, and pilot test, followed by completion and dissemination of the reporting guideline (eg, through open-access publication and conference presentations). Our team includes journal editors, clinicians, policy-makers, statisticians, methodologists, patients, and members of the public.