Additional file 2: of Methods for network meta-analysis of continuous outcomes using individual patient data: a case study in acupuncture for chronic pain

Provides WinBUGS modelling code for models 1 and 2 as described in the main text. (DOCX 41 kb

Interventions evaluated.

<p>Interventions evaluated.</p

Cost effectiveness results.

<p>Cost effectiveness results.</p

Patients randomised to trials included in the network, by comparator and study quality.

<p>NMES = neuromuscular electrical stimulation; TENS = transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation.</p

Best available quality of life data by intervention comparison.

<p>Each row denotes a pairwise comparison of interventions for which randomised controlled trial data was available. The number of symbols in each row reflects the number of trials making that comparison, shape size is proportional to the size of each study and the type of shape indicates the health related quality of life instrument used. Studies informing multiple comparisons (due to the presence of three or more trial arms) appear for each comparison. MCS = mental component summary score; NMES = neuromuscular electrical stimulation; NRS = numerical rating scale; PCS = physical component summary scores; TENS = transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation; VAS = visual analogue scale; WOMAC = Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index.</p

Cost-effectiveness plane including cost-effectiveness frontier: All trials.

<p>Each point denotes a comparator and the line denotes the cost-effectiveness frontier. This links all non-dominated comparators and therefore shows the set of comparators that could be cost-effective depending upon the cost-effectiveness threshold. The slope of the line connecting a comparator on the cost-effectiveness frontier to a lower cost comparator is equal to the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). NMES = neuromuscular electrical stimulation; TENS = transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation.</p

Cost-effectiveness plane including cost-effectiveness frontier: Trials at low risk of selection bias.

<p>Each point denotes a comparator and the line denotes the cost-effectiveness frontier. This links all non-dominated comparators and therefore shows the set of comparators that could be cost-effective depending upon the cost-effectiveness threshold. The slope of the line connecting a comparator on the cost-effectiveness frontier to a lower cost comparator is equal to the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). TENS = transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation.</p

Results of sensitivity analyses which altered cost-effective intervention.

<p>Results of sensitivity analyses which altered cost-effective intervention.</p

System-wide approaches to antimicrobial therapy and antimicrobial resistance in the UK: the AMR-X framework

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) threatens human, animal, and environmental health. Acknowledging the urgency of addressing AMR, an opportunity exists to extend AMR action-focused research beyond the confines of an isolated biomedical paradigm. An AMR learning system, AMR-X, envisions a national network of health systems creating and applying optimal use of antimicrobials on the basis of their data collected from the delivery of routine clinical care. AMR-X integrates traditional AMR discovery, experimental research, and applied research with continuous analysis of pathogens, antimicrobial uses, and clinical outcomes that are routinely disseminated to practitioners, policy makers, patients, and the public to drive changes in practice and outcomes. AMR-X uses connected data-to-action systems to underpin an evaluation framework embedded in routine care, continuously driving implementation of improvements in patient and population health, targeting investment, and incentivising innovation. All stakeholders co-create AMR-X, protecting the public from AMR by adapting to continuously evolving AMR threats and generating the information needed for precision patient and population care.</p