Considerations for assessing the feasibility of network meta-analysis of seasonal vaccines

Aim: Network meta-analyses (NMAs) of seasonal vaccines face distinct challenges that can compromise the validity and relevance of findings. While established frameworks offer guidance for evaluating the feasibility of NMAs, they do not address factors specific to seasonal vaccines. This study aims to highlight unique methodological challenges related to conducting NMA feasibility assessments of seasonal vaccines. The considerations are framed to be compatible with existing guidance and recommendations for the conduct and reporting of NMAs. Materials & methods: We developed a set of key considerations that should be applied when assessing the feasibility and/or validity of NMAs comparing seasonal vaccines. The considerations were based on systematic reviews and critical appraisals of published NMAs of seasonal vaccines, hands-on experience performing feasibility assessments of seasonal vaccines, and input from consultations with vaccine experts. Results: Unique considerations for evaluating comparability across seasonal vaccine studies include: whether vaccines should be compared by platform, formulation, dose, and/or valence; the impact of seasonality, strain evolution and definitions of placebo/unvaccinated controls on network connectivity; target population characteristics including history and recency of prior vaccination and/or infection(s), and baseline infection/severe disease risk; antigenic match (i.e., the degree of concordance between vaccine composition and circulating viral strains), which directly influences effectiveness and outcome measurement approaches that consider time varying epidemiology and assay and measure discrepancy. Comprehensively integrating these elements into existing guidance frameworks ensures transparent assessment of the key assumptions underlying NMA (i.e., transitivity and homogeneity) within the context of unique study design and methodological features of seasonal vaccine studies. Conclusion: The concepts highlighted in this paper address important gaps in the feasibility assessment process for NMAs of seasonal vaccines, which are crucial for informing public health decisions and guiding vaccine policy and implementation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research
Published
2026-06-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2026-0014
Primary Topic
COVID-19 epidemiological studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Considerations for assessing the feasibility of network meta-analysis of seasonal vaccines

Allie Cichewicz, Heather Burnett, Marissa Betts, Narcisa Mesaros
Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research
COVID-19 epidemiological studies
article

Considerations for assessing the feasibility of network meta-analysis of seasonal vaccines

Allie Cichewicz, Heather Burnett, Marissa Betts, Narcisa Mesaros
article en

Abstract

Aim: Network meta-analyses (NMAs) of seasonal vaccines face distinct challenges that can compromise the validity and relevance of findings. While established frameworks offer guidance for evaluating the feasibility of NMAs, they do not address factors specific to seasonal vaccines. This study aims to highlight unique methodological challenges related to conducting NMA feasibility assessments of seasonal vaccines. The considerations are framed to be compatible with existing guidance and recommendations for the conduct and reporting of NMAs. Materials & methods: We developed a set of key considerations that should be applied when assessing the feasibility and/or validity of NMAs comparing seasonal vaccines. The considerations were based on systematic reviews and critical appraisals of published NMAs of seasonal vaccines, hands-on experience performing feasibility assessments of seasonal vaccines, and input from consultations with vaccine experts. Results: Unique considerations for evaluating comparability across seasonal vaccine studies include: whether vaccines should be compared by platform, formulation, dose, and/or valence; the impact of seasonality, strain evolution and definitions of placebo/unvaccinated controls on network connectivity; target population characteristics including history and recency of prior vaccination and/or infection(s), and baseline infection/severe disease risk; antigenic match (i.e., the degree of concordance between vaccine composition and circulating viral strains), which directly influences effectiveness and outcome measurement approaches that consider time varying epidemiology and assay and measure discrepancy. Comprehensively integrating these elements into existing guidance frameworks ensures transparent assessment of the key assumptions underlying NMA (i.e., transitivity and homogeneity) within the context of unique study design and methodological features of seasonal vaccine studies. Conclusion: The concepts highlighted in this paper address important gaps in the feasibility assessment process for NMAs of seasonal vaccines, which are crucial for informing public health decisions and guiding vaccine policy and implementation.

Journal of Comparative Effectiveness ResearchVol. 15(7)
Heatherwood Hospital (GB), Thermo Fisher Scientific (United States) (US), Thermo Fisher Scientific (Israel) (IL)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
COVID-19 epidemiological studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.