Risk of Bias in Network Meta-Analysis (RoB NMA) tool

Carole Lunny; Julian P T Higgins; Ian R. White; Sofia Dias; Brian Hutton; Wright Jim M; Areti Angeliki Veroniki; Penny F Whiting; Andrea C Tricco

doi:10.1136/bmj-2024-079839

Risk of Bias in Network Meta-Analysis (RoB NMA) tool

Carole Lunny^*, Julian P T Higgins, Ian R. White, Sofia Dias, Brian Hutton, Wright Jim M, Areti Angeliki Veroniki, Penny F Whiting, Andrea C Tricco

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article (Academic Journal) › peer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Systematic reviews with network meta-analysis (NMA) have potential biases in their conduct, analysis, and interpretation. If the results or conclusions of an NMA are integrated into policy or practice without any consideration of risks of bias, decisions could unknowingly be based on incorrect results, which could translate to poor patient outcomes. The RoB NMA (Risk of Bias in Network Meta-Analysis) tool answers a clearly defined need for a rigorously developed tool to assess risk of bias in NMAs of healthcare interventions. In this guidance article, we describe and provide a justification for the tool’s 17 items, their mechanism of bias, pertinent examples, and how to assess an NMA based on each response option.

Original language	English
Article number	e079839
Pages (from-to)	e079839
Number of pages	23
Journal	BMJ
Volume	2025
Issue number	388
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2024-079839
Publication status	Published - 18 Mar 2025

Access to Document

10.1136/bmj-2024-079839Licence: CC BY

Handle.net

Persistent link

Cite this

@article{77499ae08d854c4da79f559feda16335,

title = "Risk of Bias in Network Meta-Analysis (RoB NMA) tool",

abstract = "Systematic reviews with network meta-analysis (NMA) have potential biases in their conduct, analysis, and interpretation. If the results or conclusions of an NMA are integrated into policy or practice without any consideration of risks of bias, decisions could unknowingly be based on incorrect results, which could translate to poor patient outcomes. The RoB NMA (Risk of Bias in Network Meta-Analysis) tool answers a clearly defined need for a rigorously developed tool to assess risk of bias in NMAs of healthcare interventions. In this guidance article, we describe and provide a justification for the tool{\textquoteright}s 17 items, their mechanism of bias, pertinent examples, and how to assess an NMA based on each response option.",

author = "Carole Lunny and Higgins, \{Julian P T\} and White, \{Ian R.\} and Sofia Dias and Brian Hutton and \{Jim M\}, Wright and Veroniki, \{Areti Angeliki\} and Whiting, \{Penny F\} and Tricco, \{Andrea C\}",

year = "2025",

month = mar,

day = "18",

doi = "10.1136/bmj-2024-079839",

language = "English",

volume = "2025",

pages = "e079839",

journal = "BMJ",

issn = "0959-8138",

publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",

number = "388",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Risk of Bias in Network Meta-Analysis (RoB NMA) tool

AU - Lunny, Carole

AU - Higgins, Julian P T

AU - White, Ian R.

AU - Dias, Sofia

AU - Hutton, Brian

AU - Jim M, Wright

AU - Veroniki, Areti Angeliki

AU - Whiting, Penny F

AU - Tricco, Andrea C

PY - 2025/3/18

Y1 - 2025/3/18

N2 - Systematic reviews with network meta-analysis (NMA) have potential biases in their conduct, analysis, and interpretation. If the results or conclusions of an NMA are integrated into policy or practice without any consideration of risks of bias, decisions could unknowingly be based on incorrect results, which could translate to poor patient outcomes. The RoB NMA (Risk of Bias in Network Meta-Analysis) tool answers a clearly defined need for a rigorously developed tool to assess risk of bias in NMAs of healthcare interventions. In this guidance article, we describe and provide a justification for the tool’s 17 items, their mechanism of bias, pertinent examples, and how to assess an NMA based on each response option.

AB - Systematic reviews with network meta-analysis (NMA) have potential biases in their conduct, analysis, and interpretation. If the results or conclusions of an NMA are integrated into policy or practice without any consideration of risks of bias, decisions could unknowingly be based on incorrect results, which could translate to poor patient outcomes. The RoB NMA (Risk of Bias in Network Meta-Analysis) tool answers a clearly defined need for a rigorously developed tool to assess risk of bias in NMAs of healthcare interventions. In this guidance article, we describe and provide a justification for the tool’s 17 items, their mechanism of bias, pertinent examples, and how to assess an NMA based on each response option.

U2 - 10.1136/bmj-2024-079839

DO - 10.1136/bmj-2024-079839

M3 - Article (Academic Journal)

C2 - 40101916

SN - 0959-8138

VL - 2025

SP - e079839

JO - BMJ

JF - BMJ

IS - 388

M1 - e079839

ER -

Risk of Bias in Network Meta-Analysis (RoB NMA) tool

Abstract

Access to Document

Handle.net

Fingerprint

Cite this