The use of network meta-analysis in the field of physical exercise and health promotion

In brief

Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials have improved our understanding of which intervention techniques in physical activity-based health behaviour change programs are superior (i.e., create the highest results). Even in the nonappearance of direct, head-to-head trials, network meta-analysis (NMA) has enabled the measurement of indirect comparisons. The foundations of NMA and popular ways for conducting NMA are covered in this blog, followed by assumptions about NMA, possibilities and challenges in NMA, and a step-by-step example of creating and conducting an NMA.

Introduction

The correct and timely synthesis of all available information is essential for further progress in physical activity and health promotion. We can now better understand the health effects of various therapies thanks to Meta-Analysis Writing Services of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Global health organizations seek quantitative evidence synthesis from simultaneous assessments of numerous intervention options.

Foundations of Network meta-analysis (NMA)

NMA is a statistical approach that combines direct (within-trial) and indirect (between-trial) comparisons of various intervention options that the Meta-Analysis Experts may not directly evaluate in the same experiment.

• Advantages of NMA

Nearest-measurement analysis (NMA) is an extension of pairwise meta-analysis that allows the study of all available evidence under identical conditions. Not only are direct comparisons from RCTs considered, but any common comparator may also be used to make indirect comparisons. Using proper statistical approaches, direct and indirect evidence can be incorporated as a weighted average in NMAs. Intervention techniques in physical exercise and health promotion primarily Writing A Meta-Analysis Paper concentrate on informational, behavioural, social, environmental, and policy factors.

• Assumptions related to NMA and risk of bias

NMA is based on several assumptions that must be verified before the analysis can be completed. First, NMA is based on the same homogeneity assumption as pairwise Writing A Meta-Analysis. This assumption assumes that trial outcomes are homogeneous, which indicates that the influence of possible modifiers for the included RCTs (aside from sample variability) should be extremely restricted, guaranteeing that all study-related factors are homogeneous. However, potential modifiers may still exist in practice, and they are not always assessed or even detectable.

• Theoretical and statistical approaches in NMA

An NMA can be conducted using either a Bayesian or a frequentist statistical paradigm. Even though the core notions of their statistical methodologies differ, these two frameworks should provide equivalent findings when the sample size is appropriate. The primary difference between these approaches is whether prior knowledge is considered while constructing the model. Frequentist approaches estimate population parameters by repeating the current data indefinitely and maximizing its likelihood function under a statistical model without considering previously known information (prior probability).

Commonly used approaches for conducting NMA

There are two sorts of methods that may be employed for NMA, aside from the differences in theoretical models. Many academics regard the contrast-based process as the standard approach for meta-analysis, but arm-based models (described below) have lately been promoted as an exciting alternative to meta-analysis comprehension.

Opportunities and challenges related to NMA

NMA is most typically employed in clinical settings where researchers evaluate the efficacy of various Clinical Meta-Analysis Experts in pharmacological therapies. The most common clinical problems for which NMA considers medication treatments include cardiovascular diseases, oncological disorders, mental health disorders, and infectious diseases.

A step-by-step example for developing and conducting an NMA

The main steps used by these authors to perform the NMA were summarized beneath

• Step 1: The research question for this study was produced to compare the effectiveness of commonly used exercise training modalities on patients with T2DM
• Step 2: Following the constructs of the Cochrane Handbook Version 5.1.0, a detailed protocol was developed to guide the study’s design, analysis, and reporting of results
• Step 3: The study selection process was conducted within available databases.
• Step 4: Two researchers involved in the study independently screened the titles and abstracts of potential studies that met the pre-established criteria for inclusion
• Step 5: Two researchers involved in the study independently extracted pre-specified data of interest, including characteristic data.
• Step 6: The researchers collaborated and used the following categories to divide the intervention arm(s) and control arms within all of the relevant RCTs
• Step 7: The NMA was employed to compare the intervention effects of the pre-defined intervention categories on T2DM patients’ glycemic control, weight loss, and cardiovascular risk factors level
• Step 8: The NMA, using the available direct and indirect evidence, produced estimates of the effect sizes between each pair of interventions for glycemic control, weight loss, and level of cardiovascular risk factor

Conclusion

The synthesis and quantification of direct data have long been useful in determining the most effective physical activity intervention techniques for promoting physical activity and healthy behaviours in different groups. However, because direct comparisons are confined to a paired structure, indirect comparisons allow researchers to utilize the available data concerning particular intervention techniques on various outcomes and provide unique insights that direct comparisons cannot deliver.

About Pubrica

The researchers and authors at Pubrica generate scientific and medical research articles that practitioners and authors may utilize as a resource. Pubrica medical writers may help you create and modify the introduction by pointing out any flaws or holes in the chosen research field to the reader. Our experts grasp the framework that follows the broad topic, problem, and context before moving on to a more complicated topic to create the hypothesis.

References

1. Su, Xiwen, et al. “Application of network meta-analysis in physical activity and health promotion.” Journal of Sport and Health Science 9.6 (2020): 511-520.
2. Molloy, G. J., et al. “Network meta-analysis in health psychology and behavioural medicine: a primer.” Health psychology review 12.3 (2018): 254-270.