Here's a fun one for #EvidenceSynthesis / #SystematicReview crowd π
@ZijunLi and me are doing a meta-analysis where we compare two groups.
We use the "Cohen's d" family of effect size metrics for the meta-analysis (comparing baseline to follow-up, immediate and later)
Some studies (e.g. smoking interventions) only report a percentage in each arm (e.g. % of smokers).
How to best convert these percentages into smth Cohen's d-ish? π€
We appreciate any help / boosting!
Top-journal NMA quality gaps now demand transitivity-first governance in HTA evidence programs
A newly published 20 March 2026 meta-research study of top-journal network meta-analyses identifies persistent weaknesses in transitivity assessment and heterogeneity diagnostics. This playbook translates that seven-day evidence signal into an execution model for HTA-facing evidence teams.
New publications from 20-23 March 2026 show rapid movement in adaptive trial design and economic evidence generation. The strategic risk is no longer lack of analysis methods, but weak lineage between trial assumptions, comparative evidence, and payer-facing models.
A 20 March 2026 review of applied transportability methods in HTA found concentrated use of inverse odds of sampling weights and limited cross-country implementation, highlighting why target-population governance and sensitivity analysis now drive decision credibility.
G-BAβs March closure wave and new NMA quality data point to a stricter comparator-governance era
A dense 19 March 2026 closure wave in Germanyβs AMNOG workflow, together with new meta-research on network meta-analysis quality published on 20 March, signals a higher bar for comparator governance, assumption traceability, and decision-grade uncertainty handling.
PBAC DUSC utilisation refresh creates a stronger evidence feedback loop for reimbursement resubmissions.
PBS updates published on 20 March 2026 refreshed DUSC utilisation analysis access, creating a practical trigger for market access teams to re-baseline assumptions, tighten evidence traceability, and align comparative evidence with budget-impact and cost-effectiveness updates.
IQWiG dossier assessment A25-154, published 16 March 2026, reassesses adjuvant nivolumab in high-risk muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma and reports a sex-specific benefit pattern based on direct randomized evidence from CheckMate 274.
On 16 March 2026, IQWiG completed project A25-153 for lisocabtagene maraleucel in relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma and reported added benefit not proven, citing absence of direct comparator-aligned evidence and methodological limitations of unanchored MAIC analyses built from single-arm sources.
NCPEβs perioperative pembrolizumab position shows the bottleneck: cost-effectiveness under uncertainty when indirect evidence informs decisions.
On 10 March 2026, the National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics recommended perioperative pembrolizumab in resectable high-risk NSCLC be considered for reimbursement if cost-effectiveness improves, citing strong direct trial evidence versus chemotherapy and uncertain indirect comparative estimates versus nivolumab-based care.
The 19 March 2026 G-BA resolution on mirdametinib in symptomatic, inoperable NF1 plexiform neurofibromas found a non-quantifiable added benefit at hint-level certainty. Decision text shows how Germany may acknowledge meaningful single-arm efficacy while withholding magnitude quantification when control-based comparative interpretation is structurally constrained.
Gjalt-Jorn Peters
AbangeLabs