Skip to main content
. 2017 Oct 25;19(12):1348–1356. doi: 10.1111/jch.13108

Table 3.

Results of consistency analysis by node‐splitting plot

Study P value Odds ratio (95% CI/CrI)
ACEIs vs placebo
Direct .072 0.73 (0.55–0.91)
Indirect 1.10 (0.76–1.50)
Network 0.82 (0.66–0.99)
ARBs vs placebo
Direct .809 0.78 (0.60–0.97)
Indirect 0.73 (0.46–1.10)
Network 0.77 (0.63–0.92)
β‐Blockers vs placebo
Direct .108 2.20 (1.10–4.40)
Indirect 1.10 (0.83–1.50)
Network 1.20 (0.92–1.60)
CCBs vs placebo
Direct .568 1.20 (0.72–1.90)
Indirect 1.00 (0.74–1.30)
Network 1.00 (0.82–1.30)
Diuretics vs placebo
Direct .361 1.60 (1.00–2.50)
Indirect 1.30 (0.94–1.80)
Network 1.40 (1.10–1.80)
β‐Blockers vs ACEIs
Direct .575 1.30 (0.78–2.20)
Indirect 1.60 (1.10–2.30)
Network 1.50 (1.10–2.00)
β‐Blockers+diuretics vs ACEIs
Direct .535 1.10 (0.58–2.10)
Indirect 1.50 (0.73–3.10)
Network 1.30 (0.82–2.10)
CCBs vs ACEIs
Direct .970 1.30 (0.81–1.90)
Indirect 1.30 (0.89–1.90)
Network 1.30 (0.99–1.70)
Diuretics vs ACEIs
Direct .127 1.40 (0.92–2.00)
Indirect 2.00 (1.50–2.90)
Network 1.70 (1.30–2.20)
β‐Blockers vs ARBs
Direct .948 1.60 (0.96–2.60)
Indirect 1.60 (1.10–2.30)
Network 1.60 (1.20–2.10)
CCBs vs ARBs
Direct .846 1.40 (0.84–2.30)
Indirect 1.30 (0.99–1.90)
Network 1.40 (1.00–1.80)
Diuretics vs ARBs
Direct .722 2.00 (1.00–4.10)
Indirect 1.80 (1.30–2.50)
Network 1.8 (1.40–2.40)
CCBs vs β‐blockers
Direct .796 0.83 (0.54–1.20)
Indirect 0.90 (0.59–1.30)
Network 0.86 (0.65–1.10)
Diuretics vs β‐blockers
Direct .624 1.20 (0.87–1.70)
Indirect 1.10 (0.72–1.60)
Network 1.10 (0.88–1.50)
CCBs vs β‐blockers+diuretics
Direct .584 0.89 (0.48–1.70)
Indirect 1.10 (0.58–2.20)
Network 0.99 (0.63–1.60)
Diuretics vs CCBs
Direct .911 1.30 (0.80–2.10)
Indirect 1.30 (0.93–1.90)
Network 1.30 (1.00–1.70)

Abbreviations: ACEIs, angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors; ARBs, angiotensin II receptor blockers; CCBs, calcium channel blockers; CI, confidence interval; CrI, credible interval.