Is adjusted indirect comparison valid?

Results of adjusted indirect comparisons of evidence from randomised controlled trials usually agree with those of the direct comparisons. The increasing number of active interventions often coincides with a lack of direct evidence from randomised trials about the relative efficacy of competing interventions. Song and colleagues (p 472) summarised empirical evidence about the validity of adjusted indirect comparison using a sample of 44 meta-analyses from 28 systematic reviews. They found moderate agreement between the statistical conclusions from the direct and adjusted indirect comparison. Adjusted indirect comparison may provide useful or supplementary information on the relative efficacy of competing interventions.

(Credit: AMY ECKERT/PHOTONICA)

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses

Fujian Song, Douglas G Altman, Anne-Marie Glenny, and Jonathan J Deeks
BMJ 2003 326: 472. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]