COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF MANAGEMENT …
SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
Manuscript title: Comparative clinical effectiveness of management strategies for sciatica: systematic review and mixed treatment comparisons meta-analyses.
INCLUDES:
Web appendix A (pg 3): Winbug codes.
Web appendix B (pg 6): Description of the interventions, population, study design and outcome data for the pairwise studies.
Table B1 (pg 6): Description of interventions.
Table B2 (pg 11): Description of participants.
Table B3 (pg 21): Summary of overall quality of included studies.
Table B4 (pg 25): Outcome data for global effect.
Table B5 (pg 33): Outcome data for pain intensity.
Web appendix C (pg 37): Results of inactive control comparisons from network meta-analyses.
Table C1 (pg 37): Probability of being best and the ORs of global effect for different treatment strategies compared with inactive control from the network meta-analysis and pairwise meta-analyses.
Table C2 (pg 38): Probability of being best and the ORs for global effect of different treatment strategies compared with inactive control from the network meta-analysis and pairwise meta-analyses based on RCTs and Q-RCTs only.
Figure C1 (pg 39): Plot of the ORs of global effects for the different treatment strategies compared with inactive control from the network meta-analysis, based on RCTs and Q-RCTs only.
Table C3 (pg 40): Probability of being best and the weighted mean difference for pain intensity for different treatment strategies compared with inactive control from the network meta-analysis and pairwise meta-analyses.
Table C4 (pg 41): Probability of being best and weighted mean difference for pain intensity of different treatment strategies compared with inactive control from the network meta-analysis and pairwise meta-analyses based on RCTs and Q-RCTs only.
Figure C2 (pg 42): Plot of the weighted mean difference for pain intensity for the different treatment strategies compared with inactive control from the MTC analysis, based on RCTs and Q-RCTs only.
Web appendix D (pg 43): Results of network meta-analyses restricted to RCTs and Q-RCTs.
Table D1 (pg 43): Results (odds ratios ORs, with 95% confidence intervals/credible intervals) of network meta-analysis for RCTs/Q-RCTs reporting global effect.
Table D2 (pg 45): Results (weighted mean difference WMD, with 95% confidence intervals/credible intervals) of network meta-analysis for RCTs/Q-RCTs reporting pain intensity.
Results of sensitivity analyses (pg 46) (a narrative summary)
Appendix E (pg 47): Assessment of model fit and between study heterogeneity
WEB APPENDIX A: WINBUG CODES
These are based on those published on the Bristol University network meta-analysis webpage ()
GLOBAL
#Random-effects model for multi-arm trials
model{
for(i in 1:NS){
w[i,1] ................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- effectiveness of online education
- effectiveness of frontline plus for dogs
- effectiveness of online learning environments
- effectiveness of online classes
- effectiveness of flu vaccine 2019
- the efficacy and effectiveness of treatment
- cost effectiveness of online learning
- effectiveness of commercials
- effectiveness of influenza vaccine 2019
- effectiveness of 2018 flu vaccine
- effectiveness of vaccines statistics
- effectiveness of flu vaccine