OUTCOME: Overall complications 
ANALYSIS: sensitivity_rct_only 
STUDIES: 2 
TREATMENTS: Conventional, Retzius, Ultra 

Original data:

                                   treat1  treat2      TE   seTE
Dalela_Detroit_RCT_2015_2016 Conventional Retzius -0.5305 0.5225
Ratanapornsompong_2020       Conventional   Ultra -0.0880 0.4196

Number of treatment arms (by study):
                             narms
Dalela_Detroit_RCT_2015_2016     2
Ratanapornsompong_2020           2

Results (random effects model):

                                   treat1  treat2     OR           95%-CI
Dalela_Detroit_RCT_2015_2016 Conventional Retzius 0.5883 [0.2113; 1.6384]
Ratanapornsompong_2020       Conventional   Ultra 0.9158 [0.4023; 2.0843]

Number of studies: k = 2
Number of pairwise comparisons: m = 2
Number of observations: o = 212
Number of treatments: n = 3
Number of designs: d = 2

Random effects model

Treatment estimate (sm = 'OR', comparison: other treatments vs 'Conventional'):
                 OR           95%-CI    z p-value
Conventional      .                .    .       .
Retzius      1.6997 [0.6104; 4.7332] 1.02  0.3100
Ultra        1.0920 [0.4798; 2.4854] 0.21  0.8339

Quantifying heterogeneity / inconsistency:
tau^2 = 0; tau = 0

Tests of heterogeneity (within designs) and inconsistency (between designs):
                Q d.f. p-value
Total           0    0      --
Within designs  0    0      --
Between designs 0    0      --

Details of network meta-analysis methods:
- Frequentist graph-theoretical approach
- Restricted maximum-likelihood estimator for tau^2

--- P-SCORE RANKING ---
             P-score
Conventional  0.7140
Ultra         0.5812
Retzius       0.2048

--- SUCRA RANKING ---
              SUCRA
Conventional 0.7157
Ultra        0.5802
Retzius      0.2041

- based on 20000 simulations

--- GLOBAL INCONSISTENCY: DESIGN-BY-TREATMENT ---
Q statistics to assess homogeneity / consistency

                   Q df p-value
Total           0.00  0      --
Within designs  0.00  0      --
Between designs 0.00  0      --

Q statistic to assess consistency under the assumption of
a full design-by-treatment interaction random effects model

                   Q df p-value tau.within tau2.within
Between designs 0.00  0      --          0           0

--- LOCAL INCONSISTENCY: NODE SPLITTING/SIDE ---
Separate indirect from direct evidence (SIDE) using back-calculation method

Random effects model: 

           comparison k prop    nma direct indir. RoR z p-value
 Retzius:Conventional 1 1.00 1.6997 1.6997      .   . .       .
   Ultra:Conventional 1 1.00 1.0920 1.0920      .   . .       .
        Retzius:Ultra 0    0 1.5565      . 1.5565   . .       .

Legend:
 comparison - Treatment comparison
 k          - Number of studies providing direct evidence
 prop       - Direct evidence proportion
 nma        - Estimated treatment effect (OR) in network meta-analysis
 direct     - Estimated treatment effect (OR) derived from direct evidence
 indir.     - Estimated treatment effect (OR) derived from indirect evidence
 RoR        - Ratio of Ratios (direct versus indirect)
 z          - z-value of test for disagreement (direct versus indirect)
 p-value    - p-value of test for disagreement (direct versus indirect)