Table 1

General characteristics of Bayesian mixed treatment comparisons

Characteristicn/N (%) or mean (SD)
Number of authors6.1 (4.8)
Was a methodologist an author on the manuscript?16/34 (47.1)
Country
 USA4/34 (11.8)
 UK12/34 (35.3)
 Canada2/34 (5.9)
 Brazil1/34 (2.9)
 China2/34 (5.9)
 Switzerland3/34 (8.8)
 The Netherlands1/34 (2.9)
 Italy3/34 (8.8)
 Belgium1/34 (2.9)
 Greece4/34 (11.8)
Funding
 Industry9/34 (26.5)
 Government/foundation10/34 (29.4)
 Unfunded6/34 (17.6)
 Other1/34 (2.9)
 Not reported8/34 (23.6)
 Declared affiliation2/34 (5.9)
 Health Technology Assessment Program1/2 (50.0)
 The Cochrane Collaboration1/2 (50.0)
 Number of printed pages16.6 (36.3)
 Supplement or appendix published20/34 (58.8)
Disease state evaluated
 Behavioural health4/34 (11.8)
 Cardiology6/34 (17.6)
 Infectious disease2/34 (5.9)
 Endocrine2/34 (5.9)
 Pulmonary2/34 (5.9)
 Pain3/34 (8.8)
 Dermatology2/34 (5.9)
 Ophthalmology2/34 (5.9)
 Rheumatology2/34 (5.9)
 Gastroenterology3/34 (8.8)
 Dental1/34 (2.9)
 Oncology4/34 (11.8)
 Substance abuse1/34 (2.9)
 Number of interventions compared*8.5 (4.3)
Type of intervention*
 Pharmacological30/35 (85.7)
 Devices3/35 (8.6)
 Other1/35 (2.9)
 Device and pharmacological1/35 (2.9)
Number of trials included in network*35.9 (30.1)
Number of patients included in network*33 459 (71 233)
  • *The trial by Orme et al included two individual networks and they are considered separately for this characteristic.