5 research outputs found

    Probabilities of being the best among competing antidepressant agents when reporting bias affects one specific agent.

    No full text
    <p>The first stacked bar at the left corresponds to the network meta-analysis free of reporting biases (ie, with the data from the 74 FDA-registered trials). The other stacked bars correspond to the 12 network meta-analyses in which reporting bias hypothetically affects one specific agent in turn. For instance, for mirtazapine, we used the 6 published trials (out of 10 FDA-registered trials), with published effect sizes, and data from the 64 FDA-registered trials for the other 11 agents, which resulted in an incomplete FDA network of 70 trials; the probability of mirtazapine being the best was 80.6% with data from the incomplete FDA network and 7.3% with data from the 74 FDA-registered trials. For the sake of clarity, we presented in each analysis the 3 drugs with the 3 highest probabilities of being the best among competing antidepressant agents. Bup: Bupropion; Cit: Citalopram; Dul : Duloxetine ; Esc: Escitalopram; Flu: Fluoxetine; Mir: Mirtazapine ; Nef: Nefazodone ; Par: Paroxetine; Par CR: Paroxetine CR; Ser: Sertraline; Ven: Venlafaxine; VenXR: Venlafaxine XR.</p

    Summary effect sizes for the 12 comparisons of each antidepressant agent and placebo.

    No full text
    <p>Weighted mean effect-size values for each drug were derived using a random-effects model with the method of DerSimonian and Laird. N: number of trials; SMD (95%CI): summary standardized mean difference of drug vs. placebo derived from random effects meta-analysis (95% confidence interval); ΀<sup>2</sup> (SE): between-trial variance as a measure of heterogeneity in meta-analysis (standard error); NA: not assessable.</p

    Probabilities that each antidepressant drug is the best according to network meta-analyses of data from 74 FDA-registered trials or 51 published trials with published effect sizes.

    No full text
    <p>For instance, for mirtazapine, the probability of being the best was 7.3% and 30.2% according to network-meta-analysis of the 74 FDA-registered trials and 51 published trials with published effect sizes, respectively. Drugs for which the probability of being the best was <5% for both published and FDA data are not labeled (blue area).</p

    Star-shaped networks of comparisons of data from 74 US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-registered trials of 12 antidepressants and their 51 related publications.

    No full text
    <p>The central node represents the placebo, and each leaf node represents an antidepressant agent. Each node diameter is proportional to the number of patients who received the antidepressant agent; each connecting line width is proportional to the number of trials that addressed the comparison.</p

    Scatterplot of estimates of relative efficacy for 66 pair-wise comparisons of the 12 antidepressant agents with one another derived from network meta-analyses of data from 74 FDA-registered trials and their 51 trial publications.

    No full text
    <p>Data are effect sizes. Positive effect sizes indicate that drug A has higher efficacy than drug B. The two areas above the uppermost dotted line (labeled +100%) and below the lowest dotted line (labeled −100%) correspond to cases in which an effect size derived from the network meta-analysis of the 51 published trials differed in absolute value from that derived from the network meta-analysis of the 74 FDA-registered trials by at least 100%. The two areas between the 2 upper dotted lines (labeled +50%) and between the 2 lower dotted lines (labeled −50%) correspond to cases in which an effect size derived from the network meta-analysis of the 51 published trials differed in absolute value from that derived from the network meta-analysis of the 74 FDA-registered trials by at least 50%. Red-colored points refer to cases in which agent B was superior to agent A by one network meta-analysis and A was superior to B by the other network meta-analysis.</p
    corecore