Using the contribution matrix to evaluate complex study limitations in a network meta-analysis: a case study of bipolar maintenance pharmacotherapy review

Furukawa, Toshi A.; Miura, Tomofumi; Chaimani, Anna; Leucht, Stefan; Cipriani, Andrea; Noma, Hisashi; Mitsuyasu, Hiroshi; Kanba, Shegenobu; Salanti, Georgia

doi:10.1186/s13104-016-2019-1

Table 1 Risk of bias assessments for each individual study and for each direct comparison against placebo

From: Using the contribution matrix to evaluate complex study limitations in a network meta-analysis: a case study of bipolar maintenance pharmacotherapy review

Comparison	Study	N	Risks of bias									RoB of each study and of comparison
Comparison	Study	N	Sequence generation	Allocation concealment	Blinding of participant	Blinding of therapist	Blinding of assessor	Incomplete outcome data	Selective reporting	Definition of recurrent mood episode	Sponsorship	RoB of each study and of comparison
PLB vs LIT	Melia 1970	11	U	U	L	L	L	U	L	H	H	H
	Cundall 1972	13	U	U	L	L	L	L	U	H	U	M
	Prien 1973a	31	U	U	L	H	L	L	H	H	L	H
	Prien 1973b	205	U	U	L	H	L	L	H	H	L	H
	Dunner 1976	40	U	U	L	L	L	L	H	H	U	H
	Fieve 1976	53	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	H	L	M
	Bowden 2000	185	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L
	Bowden 2003	116	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	H	L	M
	Calabrese 2003	242	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	H	L	M
	Amsterdam 2010	53	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L
	Weisler 2011	764	L	L	L	L	L	H	L	L	L	M
PLB vs VPA	Pooled											H
PLB vs VPA	Bowden 2000	281	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	H	M
PLB vs LTG	Pooled											M
	Calabrese 2000	182	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	H	H	H
	Bowden 2003	129	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	H	H	H
	Calabrese 2003	292	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	H	H	H
	Koyama 2011	103	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	H	H	H
PLB vs IMP	Pooled											H
	Prien 1973a	26	U	U	L	H	L	L	H	H	L	H
	Kane 1982	12	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L
PLB vs LIT + IMP	Pooled											H
PLB vs LIT + IMP	Kane 1982	13	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L
PLB vs ARP	Pooled											L
PLB vs ARP	Keck 2007	161	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	H	M
PLB vs OLZ	Pooled											M
	Tohen2006	361	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	H	M
	Vieta 2012	266	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L
PLB vs QTP	Pooled											M
	Weisler 2011	808	L	L	L	L	L	H	L	L	H	H
	Young2012	585	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	H	M
PLB vs RisLAI	Pooled											H
	Quiroz2010	275	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	H	M
	Vieta 2012	267	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	H	M
PLB vs PAL	Pooled											M
PLB vs PAL	Bewaerts 2012	300	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	H	M
LIT vs VPA	Pooled											M
	Bowden 2000	278	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	H	M
	Calabrese 2005	60	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L
	Geddes 2010	220	L	L	H	H	L	L	L	H	L	H
LIT vs CBZ	Pooled											H
	Coxhead 1992	31	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	H	H	H
	Kleindienst 2000	171	L	L	H	H	H	H	L	U	L	H
	Hartong 2003	53	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	H	M
LIT vs LTG	Pooled											M
	Bowden 2003	105	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	H	H	H
	Calabrese 2003	292	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	H	H	H
LIT vs IMP	Pooled											H
	Prien 1973a	31	U	U	L	H	L	L	H	H	L	H
	Kane 1982	9	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L
	Prien 1984	78	U	U	L	H	L	L	L	L	L	M
LIT vs LIT + IMP	Pooled											H
	Kane 1981	75	U	U	L	L	L	L	H	L	U	M
	Kane 1982	10	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L
	Prien 1984	78	U	U	L	H	L	L	L	L	L	M
LIT vs LIT + VPA	Pooled											M
LIT vs LIT + VPA	Geddes 2010	220	L	L	H	H	L	L	L	H	L	H
LIT vs LIT + OXC	Pooled											H
LIT vs LIT + OXC	Vieta 2008	55	L	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	H	M
LIT vs OLZ	Pooled											M
LIT vs OLZ	Tohen2005	431	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	H	M
LIT vs QTP	Pooled											M
LIT vs QTP	Weisler 2011	768	L	L	L	L	L	H	L	L	H	H
VPA vs LIT + VPA	Pooled											H
VPA vs LIT + VPA	Geddes 2010	220	L	L	H	H	L	L	L	H	L	H
VPA vs VPA + ARP	Pooled											H
VPA vs VPA + ARP	Woo 2011	83	U	U	L	L	L	H	L	L	H	H
LTG vs ARP + LTG	Pooled											H
LTG vs ARP + LTG	Carlson 2012	351	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	H	M
IMP vs LIT + IMP	Pooled											M
	Kane 1982	11	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L
	Prien 1984	72	U	U	L	H	L	L	L	L	L	M
OLZ vs RisLAI	Pooled											M
	Vieta 2012	263	U	U	L	L	L	L	L	L	H	M
	Pooled											M

L low risk of bias, M moderate risk of bias, H high risk of bias, U unclear risk of bias
References to studies can be found in the original paper [4]
ARP aripiprazole, CBZ carbamazepine, FLX fluoxetine, IMP imipramine, LIT lithium, LTG lamotrigine, OLZ olanzapine, OXC oxcarbazepine, PAL paliperidone, PLB placebo, QTP quetiapine, RisLAI risperidone long-acting injection, VPA valproate

Back to article page

ISSN: 1756-0500

Contact us

Submission enquiries: bmcresearchnotes@biomedcentral.com
General enquiries: ORSupport@springernature.com

BMC Research Notes

Contact us