Response to discussant comments on “NMA, the first 20 years”

Abstract

We respond to discussant comments on our paper “Twenty years of network meta‐analysis: Continuing controversies and recent developments” (https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1700) and raise some additional points for consideration, including: the way in which methodological guidance is generated; integration of the estimand framework with evidence synthesis; and implications of the European Joint Clinical Assessment. We ask: what properties are required of population adjustment methods to enable transparent and consistent decision‐making? We also ask why individual patient data is not routinely made available to re‐imbursement authorities and clinical guideline developers.