Interpreting treatment rankings in network meta-analyses (NMA) of well-being interventions

This Matters Arising article examines the interpretation of treatment rankings in network meta-analyses of well-being interventions. It highlights how network structure, indirect evidence, and risk of bias limit causal inference from comparative rankings, and cautions against their use for policy or large-scale implementation decisions. The piece emphasizes preserving performance metrics as tools for quality assessment rather than structural or prescriptive mandates.