Elsevier

The Lancet

Volume 386, Issue 9994, 15–21 August 2015, Pages 628-630
The Lancet

Comment
Network meta-analysis: a norm for comparative effectiveness?

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)61478-7Get rights and content

First page preview

First page preview
Click to open first page preview

References (12)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (90)

  • Tuina combined with Adjuvant therapy for lumbar disc herniation: A network meta-analysis

    2022, Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice
    Citation Excerpt :

    Traditional pair-wise meta-analysis cannot integrate all the evidence from different therapies at the same time, which makes it hard to comprehensively and systematically evaluate various therapies and to choose the best therapeutic scheme [22]. Therefore, we used network meta-analysis to combine both direct and indirect evidence simultaneously, rank their effectiveness and pain relief, get the best intervention plan [23,24], and provide evidence-based medical evidence for treating LDH. The protocol for this systematic review was registered at PROSPERO: CRD42020193068.

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text