Skip to contents

Identify comparisons informed by both direct and indirect evidence from independent sources in MBNMA datasets with repeated measurements in each study. These comparisons are therefore those which fulfil the criteria for testing for inconsistency via node-splitting, following the method of van Valkenhoef van Valkenhoef et al. (2016) .





An object of class "".


A data frame of comparisons that are informed by direct and indirect evidence from independent sources. Each row of the data frame is a different treatment comparison. Numerical codes in t1 and t2 correspond to treatment codes.


Similar to gemtc::mtc.nodesplit() but uses a fixed reference treatment and therefore suggests fewer loops in which to test for inconsistency. Heterogeneity can also be parameterised as inconsistency and so testing for inconsistency in additional loops whilst changing the reference treatment would also be identifying heterogeneity. Depends on igraph.


van Valkenhoef G, Dias S, Ades AE, Welton NJ (2016). “Automated generation of node-splitting models for assessment of inconsistency in network meta-analysis.” Res Synth Methods, 7(1), 80-93. ISSN 1759-2887 (Electronic) 1759-2879 (Linking), doi:10.1002/jrsm.1167 ,


# Create object
network <-
#> Reference treatment is `Pl_0`
#> Studies reporting change from baseline automatically identified from the data

# Identify comparisons informed by direct and indirect evidence
#>   t1 t2     path
#> 5  3 22 3->1->22
#> 4  3 15 3->1->15