Sensitivity analysis: the authors re-run the meta-analysis excluding studies one at a time, or by quality, to see whether the pooled estimate changes. Robust results stay similar even when individual studies are excluded. The honest answer is that it depends, and here is what it depends on.
When a network meta-analysis is defensible and when it is not I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below.
Network meta-analysis, from the point of view of someone who has read the documentation and is still stuck.
Saying which parts I have understood so that nobody wastes time re-explaining them, and where exactly the understanding stops.
Narrowing the opening post, because the general version has more than one answer.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria: a meta-analysis is only as good as its inclusion criteria. If the criteria are too broad, apples and oranges get pooled. If they are too narrow, the meta-analysis answers a overly specific question.
Same conclusion as the reply above, reached differently, which is mildly reassuring.
Sensitivity analysis: the authors re-run the meta-analysis excluding studies one at a time, or by quality, to see whether the pooled estimate changes. Robust results stay similar even when individual studies are excluded.
The honest answer is that it depends, and here is what it depends on.
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Revisiting: What pooling buys you and what it destroys
On the subject in the title: Revisiting: What pooling buys you and what it destroys Working notes rather than a conclusion. Pooling buys — I have the observation and I do not trust my interpretation of it, so…
|
+97 | 107 | 4k | 19h |
|
Random versus fixed effects: choosing rather than defaulting
Random versus fixed effects: choosing rather than defaulting — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Random versus fixed effects, and specifically the version of it that the…
|
+16 | 20 | 22k | 13mo |
|
Risk-of-bias tools and the judgement they conceal — does this still hold?
Risk-of-bias tools and the judgement they conceal — does this still hold? — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Asking about Risk-of-bias tools on behalf of…
|
+26 | 30 | 5.8k | 23h |
|
Pooling trials with different estimands — what changed since
Pooling trials with different estimands — what changed since — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. What changes if the standard account of Pooling trials with different…
|
+57 | 64 | 12k | 7mo |
|
What pooling buys you and what it destroys
The question in the title: What pooling buys you and what it destroys I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. The question about pooling buys that I actually want answered is the…
|
+74 | 83 | 6.6k | 8mo |
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[2026 update] Amylin and gastric emptying: overlapping mechanisms with incretins
Amylin and gastric emptying: overlapping mechanisms with incretins — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. A question about Amylin and gastric emptying that I think has a…
|
+21 | 25 | 44k | 5mo |
|
SURMOUNT-4 and what withdrawal data does and does not tell an individual
SURMOUNT-4 and what withdrawal data does and does not tell an individual — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. I would like to disagree carefully with the settled view on…
|
4 | 42k | 11mo | |
|
Coming back to: Semaglutide in people without diabetes: what the evidence base looks like
On the subject in the title: Semaglutide in people without diabetes: what the evidence base looks like Working notes rather than a conclusion. Two things I would like separated before anyone answers on…
|
+41 | 46 | 1.2k | 4mo |
|
[2026 update] What we do not know about retatrutide, listed explicitly
What we do not know about retatrutide, listed explicitly — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Putting the numbers in the first post, because a question…
|
+79 | 83 | 952 | 11mo |
|
Amylin analogue mechanism: satiety signalling separate from GLP-1
Amylin analogue mechanism: satiety signalling separate from GLP-1 — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Trying to work out what would count as evidence on amylin analogue…
|
+128 | 142 | 38k | 13mo |