Creation of Working Groups to tackle methodological and practical issues in comparing multiple interventions

Working Group 1: Fundamental considerations

This group will address fundamental issues associated with the initiation and logistics of undertaking, publishing and maintaining reviews that compare multiple interventions. More specifically, the group plans to address:

  • When it is appropriate to compare multiple interventions? 
  • What are the methodological considerations associated with the selection of interventions to be included (including legacy treatments)?
  • How might CRGs develop their strategy to deal with out-of-date reviews, authorship, and topics that overlap across CRGs?

The working group will also work on refining the sequential approach described in Section 6, and on issues associated with the inclusion of non–Cochrane reviews and individual studies in OoRs.

 

Working Group 2: Statistical issues

This group will concentrate on the statistical considerations. These include:

  • When are indirect comparisons and MTM appropriate?
  • What are the appropriate statistical methods for indirect comparisons and MTM?
  • What is the assumption of ‘consistency’, how it can be evaluated and what should be done when substantial inconsistency is found?
  • How should we present and interpret the results of a MTM?
  • What software is suitable for each type of analysis?
  • To what extent can RevMan support MTM?

 

Working Group 3: Summaries of findings and assessing risk of bias

This group will focus on the interpretation of the evidence included in a review that compares multiple interventions. Questions addressed by this group include:

  • What is the role of RoB in indirect comparisons?
  • Is direct evidence always preferable to the indirect evidence?
  • What are the necessary adjustments in SoF tables so they can be used for CMIRs?

It was agreed that close links should be established with the GRADE Working Group, the Cochrane Applicability and Recommendations Methods Group and the Cochrane Bias Methods Group.

The three groups have some overlap in their scope and they will work in co-ordination to prepare specific guidance.

Other sections of this report:

Addressing multiple interventions in Cochrane Intervention Reviews

Addressing multiple interventions in Cochrane Overviews of Reviews

Clarification of the distinction between Intervention Reviews and Overviews of Reviews

Implications of Overviews for authors and editors of Intervention Reviews

A sequential approach for undertaking reviews that compare multiple-interventions

Role of the Cochrane Comparing Multiple Interventions Methods Group


Summary of recommendations