Skip to contents

A database with 217 systematic reviews with network meta-analysis (NMA) published from 2004 to April 14, 2015. The collected systematic reviews were retrieved from the R package nmadb and pertain to those with available data in the R package nmadb.

Usage

data(index)

Format

A data-frame with 217 rows and 10 columns referring to the analysed systematic reviews with NMA and their characteristics, respectively.

Source

Turner RM, Davey J, Clarke MJ, Thompson SG, Higgins JP. Predicting the extent of heterogeneity in meta-analysis, using empirical data from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Int J Epidemiol 2012;41(3):818--27. doi: 10.1093/ije/dys041.

Details

The characteristics of the systematic reviews comprise:

nmadb.IDThe ID number as provided in the R package nmadb.
PMIDThe PMID number.
First.AuthorThe name of the first author.
YearThe year of publication.
Journal.NameThe abbreviated name of the journal.
TitleThe title of the systematic review.
Outcome.TypeThe outcome type as suggested by Turner et al. (2012) and distinguished into objective, semi-objective and subjective.
Intervention.Comparison.TypeThe treatment-comparator type as suggested by Turner et al. (2012) and distinguished into pharmacological versus placebo, pharmacological versus pharmacological, and non-pharmacological versus any.
Includes.ToC.whereWhether the extracted study-level aggregate characteristics were found in the main article, Appendix or both.
Source.ToCThe exact location in the systematic review where the extracted study-level aggregate characteristics were found, such as Table X in the main article, and/ or Appendix.
CommentNotes related to the extraction for the selected systematic review(s).

Except for PMID, Includes.ToC.where, Source.ToC, and Comment, all other characteristics were retrieved from the R package nmadb using the function getNMADB and subsetting to those systematic reviews with available data (i.e., Data.available == "True" when using the function getNMADB). The database was reduced further during extraction, for instance, due to the limited reporting quality and data of the systematic review relating to the extraction process.

See also