MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109391487 · doi:10.1186/2046-4053-3-110

A Microsoft-Excel-based tool for running and critically appraising network meta-analyses—an overview and application of NetMetaXL

2014· article· en· W2109391487 on OpenAlexafffund
Stephen Brown, Brian Hutton, Tammy Clifford, Doug Coyle, Daniel Grima, George A. Wells, Chris Cameron

Bibliographic record

VenueSystematic Reviews · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaCanadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in HealthOttawa Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsComputer scienceBayesian networkSoftwareMacroSet (abstract data type)Pairwise comparisonGraphical user interfaceData miningInterface (matter)Machine learningArtificial intelligenceProgramming languageOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The use of network meta-analysis has increased dramatically in recent years. WinBUGS, a freely available Bayesian software package, has been the most widely used software package to conduct network meta-analyses. However, the learning curve for WinBUGS can be daunting, especially for new users. Furthermore, critical appraisal of network meta-analyses conducted in WinBUGS can be challenging given its limited data manipulation capabilities and the fact that generation of graphical output from network meta-analyses often relies on different software packages than the analyses themselves. METHODS: We developed a freely available Microsoft-Excel-based tool called NetMetaXL, programmed in Visual Basic for Applications, which provides an interface for conducting a Bayesian network meta-analysis using WinBUGS from within Microsoft Excel. . This tool allows the user to easily prepare and enter data, set model assumptions, and run the network meta-analysis, with results being automatically displayed in an Excel spreadsheet. It also contains macros that use NetMetaXL's interface to generate evidence network diagrams, forest plots, league tables of pairwise comparisons, probability plots (rankograms), and inconsistency plots within Microsoft Excel. All figures generated are publication quality, thereby increasing the efficiency of knowledge transfer and manuscript preparation. RESULTS: We demonstrate the application of NetMetaXL using data from a network meta-analysis published previously which compares combined resynchronization and implantable defibrillator therapy in left ventricular dysfunction. We replicate results from the previous publication while demonstrating result summaries generated by the software. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the freely available NetMetaXL successfully demonstrated its ability to make running network meta-analyses more accessible to novice WinBUGS users by allowing analyses to be conducted entirely within Microsoft Excel. NetMetaXL also allows for more efficient and transparent critical appraisal of network meta-analyses, enhanced standardization of reporting, and integration with health economic evaluations which are frequently Excel-based.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.098
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.098
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0140.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1380.025

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.811
GPT teacher head0.580
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
GenreSoftware

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations213
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystematic ReviewsSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207