Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Dec;15(8):1137-40.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.06.001. Epub 2012 Sep 7.

Rank reversal in indirect comparisons

Edward C Norton  1 , Morgen M Miller, Jason J Wang, Kasey Coyne, Lawrence C Kleinman
Affiliations

Rank reversal in indirect comparisons

Edward C Norton et al. Value Health. 2012 Dec.

Abstract

Objective: To describe rank reversal as a source of inconsistent interpretation intrinsic to indirect comparison (Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE, Walter SD. The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epi 1997;50:683-91) of treatments and to propose best practice.

Methods: We prove our main points with intuition, examples, graphs, and mathematical proofs. We also provide software and discuss implications for research and policy.

Results: When comparing treatments by indirect means and sorting them by effect size, three common measures of comparison (risk ratio, risk difference, and odds ratio) may lead to vastly different rankings.

Conclusions: The choice of risk measure matters when making indirect comparisons of treatments. The choice should depend primarily on the study design and the conceptual framework for that study.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Isoquants for the point (.4, .6).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Isoquants for the point (.4, .6).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Isoquants for the point (.1, .2).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Isoquants for the point (.8, .9).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE, Walter SD. The Results of Direct and Indirect Treatment Comparisons in Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Clin Epi. 1997;50:683–91. - PubMed
    1. Song F, Glenny A-M, Altman DG. Indirect Comparison in Evaluating Relative Efficacy Illustrated by Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in Colorectal Surgery. Controlled Clinical Trials. 2000;21:488–97. - PubMed
    1. Glenny AM, Altman DG, Song F, Sakarovitch C, et al. Indirect comparisons of competing interventions. Health Technol Assess. 2005;9:1–134. - PubMed
    1. Song F, Altman DG, Glenny AM, Deeks JJ. Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: Empirical evidence from published meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;326:472–5. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Eckermann S, Coory M, Willan AR. Indirect comparison: Relative risk fallacies and odds solution. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62:1031–36. - PubMed

Publication types