text:
Download citation file:
From Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece; School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom; Center for Evidence-Based Medicine, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island; Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University, Stanford, California; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michaels Hospital and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts; American College of Physicians, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Spanish Medicines and Healthcare Products Agency, Madrid, Spain, Nordic Cochrane Centre, Copenhagen, Denmark; Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland; INSERM, L'Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France; and Centre for Statistics in Medicine and University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Financial Support: By the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health and Pfizer Canada for the development of this work. Dr. Hutton is supported by a New Investigator Award from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Drug Safety and Effectiveness Network. Dr. Caldwell is supported by a Medical Research Council Population Health Science Fellowship award (G0902118). Mr. Cameron is a recipient of a Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (funding reference number CGV 121171) and is a trainee on the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Drug Safety and Effectiveness Network team grant (funding reference number 116573). The Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS) is funded by a grant from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation.
Disclosures: Dr. Hutton reports honoraria from Amgen Canada. Dr. Thorlund reports that he is a cofounding partner and majority shareholder of Redwood Outcomes. Dr. Jansen reports that he is a cofounding partner and majority shareholder of Redwood Outcomes. Authors not named here have disclosed no conflicts of interest. Disclosures can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=M14-2385.
Editors' Disclosures: Christine Laine, MD, MPH, Editor in Chief, reports that she has no financial relationships or interests to disclose. Darren B. Taichman, MD, PhD, Executive Deputy Editor, reports that he has no financial relationships or interests to disclose. Cynthia D. Mulrow, MD, MSc, Senior Deputy Editor, reports that she has no relationships or interests to disclose. Deborah Cotton, MD, MPH, Deputy Editor, reports that she has no financial relationships or interest to disclose. Jaya K. Rao, MD, MHS, Deputy Editor, reports that she has stock holdings/options in Eli Lilly and Pfizer. Sankey V. Williams, MD, Deputy Editor, reports that he has no financial relationships or interests to disclose. Catharine B. Stack, PhD, MS, Deputy Editor for Statistics, reports that she has stock holdings in Pfizer.
Requests for Single Reprints: Brian Hutton, PhD, MSc, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Center for Practice Changing Research, The Ottawa Hospital–General Campus, 501 Smyth Road, PO Box 201B, Ottawa, Ontario K1H 8L6, Canada; e-mail, email@example.com.
Current Author Addresses:Drs. Hutton and Moher and Mr. Cameron: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Center for Practice Changing Research, The Ottawa Hospital–General Campus, 501 Smyth Road, PO Box 201B, Ottawa, Ontario K1H 8L6, Canada.
Drs. Salanti and Chaimani: Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, University of Ioannina School of Medicine, University Campus Ioannina 45110, Ioannina, Greece.
Dr. Caldwell: School of Social and Community Medicine, Canynge Hall, 39 Whately Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, United Kingdom.
Dr. Schmid: Center for Evidence-Based Medicine, Brown University School of Public Health, Box G-S121-8, Providence, RI 02912.
Dr. Ioannidis: Stanford Prevention Research Center, Stanford University School of Medicine, Medical School Office Building, 1265 Welch Road, Mail Code 5411, Stanford, CA 94305-5411.
Dr. Straus: Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, Ontario M5B 1W8, Canada.
Drs. Thorlund and Jansen: 1505 West Second Avenue, Suite 302, Vancouver, British Columbia V6H 3Y4, Canada.
Dr. Mulrow: American College of Physicians, 190 N. Independence Mall West, Philadelphia, PA 19106.
Dr. Catála-López: Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance, Spanish Medicines and Healthcare Products Agency, Campezo 1, 28022 Madrid, Spain.
Dr. Gøtzsche: Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Department 7811, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Dr. Dickersin: Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 North Wolfe Street, Room E6152, Baltimore, MD 21205.
Dr. Boutron: Centre d'Epidémiologie Clinique, L'Université Paris Descartes Centre de recherche Epidémiologies et Statistique, INSERM U1153, Equipe: Méthodes en évaluation thérapeutique des maladies chroniques, Hópital Hôtel Dieu, Aile A2 1er étage, 1 Place du parvis Notre Dame, 75181 Paris, Cedex 4, France.
Dr. Altman: Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Botnar Research Centre, Windmill Road, Oxford OX3 7LD, United Kingdom.
Author Contributions:Conception and design: B. Hutton, G. Salanti, D. Moher, C.H. Schmid, A. Chaimani, D.M. Caldwell, K. Thorlund.
Analysis and interpretation of the data: B. Hutton, D. Moher, D.M. Caldwell, A. Chaimani, K. Thorlund, C.H. Schmid, S. Straus, P.C. Gøtzsche.
Drafting of the article: B. Hutton, G. Salanti, D.M. Caldwell, C.H. Schmid, K. Thorlund, D. Moher, C. Cameron, C. Mulrow, F. Catalá-López, P.C. Gøtzsche.
Critical revision of the article for important intellectual content: B. Hutton, G. Salanti, D.M. Caldwell, A. Chaimani, C.H. Schmid, C. Cameron, J.P.A. Ioannidis, S. Straus, K. Thorlund, J.P. Jansen, C. Mulrow, F. Catalá-López, P.C. Gøtzsche, K. Dickersin, I. Boutron, D.G. Altman, D. Moher.
Final approval of the article: B. Hutton, G. Salanti, D.M. Caldwell, A. Chaimani, C.H. Schmid, C. Cameron, J.P.A. Ioannidis, S. Straus, K. Thorlund, J.P. Jansen, C. Mulrow, F. Catalá-López, P.C. Gøtzsche, K. Dickersin, I. Boutron, D.G. Altman, D. Moher.
Statistical expertise: B. Hutton, G. Salanti, A. Chaimani, C.H. Schmid, D.M. Caldwell, K. Thorlund, C. Cameron, D.G. Altman.
Obtaining of funding: B. Hutton, D. Moher.
The PRISMA statement is a reporting guideline designed to improve the completeness of reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Authors have used this guideline worldwide to prepare their reviews for publication. In the past, these reports typically compared 2 treatment alternatives. With the evolution of systematic reviews that compare multiple treatments, some of them only indirectly, authors face novel challenges for conducting and reporting their reviews. This extension of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) statement was developed specifically to improve the reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses.
A group of experts participated in a systematic review, Delphi survey, and face-to-face discussion and consensus meeting to establish new checklist items for this extension statement. Current PRISMA items were also clarified. A modified, 32-item PRISMA extension checklist was developed to address what the group considered to be immediately relevant to the reporting of network meta-analyses.
This document presents the extension and provides examples of good reporting, as well as elaborations regarding the rationale for new checklist items and the modification of previously existing items from the PRISMA statement. It also highlights educational information related to key considerations in the practice of network meta-analysis. The target audience includes authors and readers of network meta-analyses, as well as journal editors and peer reviewers.
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are fundamental tools for the generation of reliable summaries of health care information for clinicians, decision makers, and patients. Systematic reviews provide information on clinical benefits and harms of interventions, inform the development of clinical recommendations, and help to identify future research needs. In 1999 and 2009, respectively, groups developed the Quality of Reporting of Meta-Analyses (QUOROM) statement (1) and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement (2–3) to improve the reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Both statements have been widely used, and coincident with their adoption, the quality of reporting of systematic reviews has improved (4–5).
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses often address the comparative effectiveness of multiple treatment alternatives. Because randomized trials that evaluate the benefits and harms of multiple interventions simultaneously are difficult to perform, comparative effectiveness reviews typically involve many studies that have addressed only a subset of the possible treatment comparisons. Traditionally, meta-analyses have usually compared only 2 interventions at a time, but the need to summarize a comprehensive and coherent set of comparisons based on all of the available evidence has led more recently to synthesis methods that address multiple interventions. These methods are commonly referred to as network meta-analysis, mixed treatment comparisons meta-analysis, or multiple treatments meta-analysis (6–8). In recent years, there has been a notable increase in the publication of articles using these methods (9). On the basis of our recent overview (10) of reporting challenges in the field, as well as findings from our Delphi exercise involving researchers and journal editors, we believe that reporting guidance for such analyses is sorely needed.
In this article, we describe the process of developing specific advice for the reporting of systematic reviews that incorporate network meta-analyses, and we present the guidance generated from this process.
We followed an established approach for this work (11). We formed a steering committee (consisting of Drs. Hutton, Salanti, Moher, Caldwell, Chaimani, Schmid, Thorlund, and Altman); garnered input from 17 journal editors, reporting guideline authors, and researchers with extensive experience in systematic reviews and network meta-analysis; and performed an overview of existing reviews of the reporting quality of network meta-analyses to identify candidate elements important to report in network meta-analyses (10). We also implemented an online Delphi survey of authors of network meta-analyses in mid-2013 (215 invited; response rate, 114 [53%]) by using Fluid Surveys online software (Fluidware, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada) to determine consensus items for which either a new checklist item or an elaboration statement would be required, and to identify specific topics requiring further discussion.
Next, we held a 1-day, face-to-face meeting to discuss the structure of the extension statement, topics requiring further consideration, and publication strategy. After this meeting, members of the steering committee and some of the meeting participants were invited to contribute specific components for this guidance. All participants reviewed drafts of the report.
This document provides reporting guidance primarily intended for authors, peer reviewers, and editors. It may also help clinicians, technology assessment practitioners, and patients understand and interpret network meta-analyses. We also aim to help readers develop a greater understanding of core concepts, terminology, and issues associated with network meta-analysis.
This document is not intended to be prescriptive about how network meta-analyses should be conducted or interpreted; considerable literature addressing such matters is available (6, 12–51). Instead, we seek to provide guidance on important information to be included in reports of systematic reviews that address networks of multiple treatment comparisons. For specific checklist items where we have suggested modification of instructions from the PRISMA statement, we have included examples of potential approaches for reporting different types of information. However, modified approaches to those presented here may also be feasible.
This document describes modifications of checklist items from the original PRISMA statement for systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses. It also describes new checklist items that are important for transparent reporting of such reviews. We present an integrated checklist of 32 items, along with elaborations that demonstrate good reporting practice. The elaboration (Appendix,) describes each item and presents examples for new or modified items. Although new items have been added in what was deemed the most logical place in the core PRISMA checklist, we do not prescribe an order in which these must be addressed. The elaboration also includes 5 boxes that highlight methodological considerations for network meta-analysis.
The Table presents the PRISMA network analysis checklist that authors may use for tracking inclusion of key elements in reports of network meta-analyses. The checklist has been structured to present core PRISMA items and modifications of these items where needed, as well as new checklist items specific to network meta-analysis. Checklist items are designated "New Item" in the main text if they address a particular aspect of reporting that is novel to network meta-analyses; these are labeled S1 through S5. The heading "Addition" indicates discussion of an issue that was covered by the original PRISMA statement but requires additional considerations for reviews incorporating network meta-analyses. Examples with elaborations have been provided for checklist items in these 2 categories.
Systematic reviews comparing the benefits and harms of multiple treatments are more complex than those comparing only 2 treatments. To present their underlying evidence base, reviews involving a network meta-analysis commonly include a graph of the network to summarize the numbers of studies that compared the different treatments and the numbers of patients who have been studied for each treatment (Figure 1). This network graph consists of nodes (points representing the competing interventions) and edges (adjoining lines between the nodes that show which interventions have been compared among the included studies). The sizes of the nodes and the thicknesses of the edges in network graphs typically represent the amounts of respective evidence for specific nodes and comparisons. Sometimes, additional edges are added to distinguish comparisons that may be part of multigroup studies that compare more than 2 treatments.
Overview of a network graph.
A network graph presenting the evidence base for a hypothetical review of 4 interventions is shown. Treatments are represented by nodes and head-to-head studies between treatments are represented by edges. The sizes of edges and nodes are used to visually depict the available numbers of studies comparing interventions and the numbers of patients studied with each treatment.
The graphs also allow readers to note particular features of the shape of a treatment network. This includes the identification of closed loops in the network; a closed loop is present in a treatment network when 3 or more comparators are connected to each other through a polygon, as in Figure 1 for treatments A, B, and C. This shows that treatments A, B, and C have all been compared against each other in existing studies, and thus each comparison in the closed loop (AB, AC, BC) is informed by both direct and indirect evidence (see the Box for definitions of direct and indirect evidence and Figure 2 for a graphical representation of terms in the Box).
Terminology: Reviews With Networks of Multiple Treatments
Terms are discussed further in the Box.Top. Adjusted indirect treatment comparison of treatments B and C based on studies that used a common comparator, treatment A. Middle. A network of 8 treatments and a common comparator, with a mix of comparisons against the control treatment and a subset of all possible comparisons between active treatments. Bottom. A treatment network similar to that shown in the middle panel, but with study data available for an additional 4 comparisons in the network which form closed loops.
Graphical overview of the terminologies that are related to the study of treatment networks.
All phases of the clinical research cycle generate considerable waste, from posing irrelevant questions to inappropriate study methods, bad reporting, and inadequate dissemination of the completed report. Poor reporting is not an esoteric issue. It can introduce biased estimates of an intervention's effectiveness and thus affect patient care and decision making. Journals regularly publish new evidence regarding some aspect of inadequate reporting (52). Improving the completeness and transparency of reporting research is a low-hanging fruit to help reduce waste, and possibly explains the rise in developing reporting guidelines (53–54) and such initiatives as the EQUATOR Network.
The PRISMA statement was aimed at improving the reporting of traditional pairwise systematic reviews and meta-analyses; it has been endorsed by hundreds of journals and editorial groups. Some extensions have been developed, including PRISMA for reporting abstracts (55) and equity (56). Other extensions are in various stages of development, including those for individual patient–data meta-analyses and harms.
Here, we describe a PRISMA extension for reporting network meta-analyses, which includes a 32-item checklist and flow diagram. This extension adds 5 new items that authors should consider when reporting a network meta-analysis, as well as 11 modifications to existing PRISMA items. Some of these are minor, whereas others are more complex, such as items 20 and 21, which ask authors to describe the results of individual studies and the corresponding syntheses thereof.
For network meta-analysis, in which it is likely that more studies and treatments will be included compared with traditional pairwise reviews, this added reporting might require authors to prepare several supplemental files as part of the manuscript submission process. Journal editors will need to make allowances for these additional materials.
Certain modifications included in some of the checklist items (for example, assessment of model fit, rationale for lumping of interventions, and presentation of tabulated study characteristics) involve considerations that are equally applicable to traditional meta-analyses of 2 treatments. Although it could be suggested that these do not warrant listing as modifications, we believe this is worthwhile; several of these items were not explicitly addressed in the PRISMA statement and could be more commonly encountered when dealing with networks of treatments. Several coauthors of this reporting guidance are also members of the authorship team of the PRISMA statement and will bring these items forward when the PRISMA statement is updated in the future.
Optimally, we would like journals to endorse this extension in much the same way they have done for the PRISMA statement. Endorsement is probably best achieved through unambiguous language in the journal's instructions to authors; example wording is provided in the Appendix.
Endorsement is important, but it is less potent without implementation. At the simplest level, implementation can involve asking authors to populate the PRISMA network meta-analysis checklist with appropriate text from their report, and not accepting a submission unless this is provided. Some editors—particularly of those smaller journals, where most systematic reviews are published (57)—may perceive any endorsement and implementation as a barrier to receiving network meta-analyses reports. There are few data to support this perception. Editors can promote reporting guideline endorsement and implementation as an important way to improve the completeness and transparency of what they publish (58–59), thus upholding one of the central tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki (60). In addition, this will reduce waste in reporting research.
There has been a steep upward trajectory of published network meta-analysis (8–9) and methods research as the field rapidly gains momentum and interest. To help keep this PRISMA extension as up-to-date and evidence-based as possible, we invite readers to let us know about emerging evidence to help inform future updates.
Identify the report as including the evaluation of a network of multiple treatment comparisons (for example, "network meta-analysis").
Different combined oral contraceptives and the risk of venous thrombosis: systematic review and network meta-analysis. (61)
Network meta-analysis on randomized trials focusing on the preventive effect of statins on contrast-induced nephropathy. (62)
Recent literature has documented the rapid increase in the publication of reviews incorporating networks of treatments and highlights a need to develop appropriate identification of such publications in literature databases (8). Consistent inclusion of the appropriate term in journal article titles will increase the ability to identify network meta-analyses.
Guidance from the PRISMA statement is transferable to reviews incorporating network meta-analyses, although some additional considerations are worthy of inclusion. The abstract from a recent systematic review of treatments for prevention of asthma exacerbations by Loymans and colleagues (63) highlights these features.
Objective. To determine the comparative effectiveness and safety of current maintenance strategies in preventing exacerbations of asthma.
Design. Systematic reviewand network meta-analysisusing Bayesian statistics.
Data Sources. Cochrane systematic reviewson chronic asthma, complemented by an updated search when appropriate.
Eligibility Criteria. Trials of adults with asthma randomised to maintenance treatments of at least 24 weeks duration and that reported on asthma exacerbations in full text. Low dose inhaled corticosteroid treatment was the comparator strategy. The primary effectiveness outcome was the rate of severe exacerbations. The secondary outcome was the composite of moderate or severe exacerbations. The rate of withdrawal was analysed as a safety outcome.
Results. 64 trials with 59,622 patient years of follow-up comparing 15 strategies and placebo were included. For prevention of severe exacerbations, combined inhaled corticosteroids and long acting β-agonists as maintenance and reliever treatment and combined inhaled corticosteroids and long acting β-agonists in a fixed daily dose performed equally well and were ranked first for effectiveness. The rate ratios compared with low dose inhaled corticosteroids were 0.44 (95% CrI 0.29 to 0.66) and 0.51 (0.35 to 0.77), respectively. Other combined strategies were not superior to inhaled corticosteroids and all single drug treatments were inferior to single low dose inhaled corticosteroids. Safety was best for conventional best (guideline based) practice and combined maintenance and reliever therapy.
Conclusions. Strategies with combined inhaled corticosteroids and long acting β-agonists are most effective and safe in preventing severe exacerbations of asthma, although some heterogeneity was observed in this network meta-analysisof full text reports.
The inclusion of some additional information is worthwhile for systematic reviewsthat include network meta-analyses. The design or methods section of the structured abstract should mention that a network meta-analysiswas conducted. Given that in some reviews treatment networks may be large and involve many pairwise comparisons between treatments, authors may summarize findings using estimates versus a particular treatment of interest (for example, the apparent "best" treatment, placebo, and so forth). When treatments are ranked by efficacy or safety (Appendix Box 1), it is also recommended that authors describe the relative effects. Selective focus on particular comparisons alone—for example, only those meeting statistical significance—should be avoided. Authors are also encouraged to briefly note any concerns (for example, violations of analytical assumptions as described in Appendix Boxes 2 and 3) that may have an important effect on the interpretation of findings.
Probabilities and Rankings in Network Meta-analysis
The Assumption of Transitivity for Network Meta-analysis
Network Meta-analysis and Assessment of Consistency of Findings
Briefly state why consideration of a network of multiple treatments is essential to the review (63–66).
Although progress has been achieved in the field and patients live longer, the relative merits of the many different chemotherapy and targeted treatment regimens are not well understood. Hundreds of trials have been conducted to compare treatments for advanced breast cancer, but because each has compared only two or a few treatments, it is difficult to integrate information on the relative efficacy of all tested regimens. This integration is important because different regimens vary both in cost and in toxicity. Therefore, we performed a comprehensive systematic review of chemotherapy and targeted treatment regimens in advanced breast cancer and evaluated through a multiple-treatments meta-analysis the relative merits of the many different regimens used to prolong survival in advanced breast cancer patients. (67)
Authors should briefly clarify to readers why a systematic reviewusing a network meta-analysisapproach was chosen to answer the research question. Possible rationales may include a lack of head-to-head randomized trialscomparing treatments of interest, or the need to assess several treatments in developing a clinically meaningful understanding of the relative effectiveness or harms of different treatment options.
Guidance from the original PRISMA statement applies. State the research question being addressed in the systematic reviewin terms of the PICOS criteria (population, intervention, comparators, outcome[s], study design).
Guidance from the original PRISMA statement applies. The protocol for the review should be registered.
The PRISMA statement outlines that authors provide a description of essential study characteristics (for example, PICOS details and duration of follow-up) and report characteristics (such as eligible publication years and eligible publication languages) that were used as eligibility criteria for the review. In network meta-analyses, authors should also clearly describe inclusion and exclusion criteria for treatment regimens (that is, nodes) and should provide justification when treatment nodes are merged to form single comparators (a practice sometimes described as "lumping" of interventions; see example below). Authors should describe the included treatments and adherence to and assessment of the transitivity assumption (Appendix Box 2).
Example: Lumping of Interventions
Our analysis classified fluids as crystalloids (divided into balanced and unbalanced solutions) and colloids (divided into albumin, gelatin, and low- and high-molecular weight hydroxyethyl starch [HES] [threshold molecular weight, 150 000 kDa]). We considered fluid balanced if it contained an anion of a weak acid (buffer) and its chloride content was correspondingly less than in 0.9% sodium chloride. The relevant analyses were a 4-node NMA [network meta-analysis] (crystalloids vs. albumin vs. HES vs. gelatin), a 6-node NMA (crystalloids vs. albumin vs. HES vs. gelatin, with crystalloids divided into balanced or unbalanced and HES divided into low or high molecular weight), and a conventional direct frequentist fixed effects meta-analytic comparison of crystalloids versus colloids. (68)
Often, one has to decide whether to lump or split treatments—that is, whether to combine different doses of the same drug, alternative forms of administration of the same drug, or varying durations of administration, or different controls. Lumping requires treatments to have similar treatment effects, and although this technique is appropriate in some cases, it should be supported by a clear rationale when performed.
Specification of the patient and study characteristics of interest should also be clarified in this section. Although this remains similar to guidance from the PRISMA statement, it is important to provide additional detail with regard to the interventions and comparators included to define the network structure. For example, older "legacy" treatments may no longer be considered relevant if they have been abandoned in clinical practice; however, their inclusion in the treatment network may be useful if they introduce connections to other treatments that are of primary interest. The most common example would be the inclusion of placebo, an intervention that will increase the amount of information available for many networks (32).
Issues of transitivity (that is, the existence of comparable distributions of patient characteristics across studies in the treatment network [Appendix Box 2]) can be discussed when describing eligibility criteria. Ideally, all evidence comparing relevant interventions in the target population of interest should be included in order to provide clinically useful results. However, the larger the network, the more likely it becomes that some of its pieces may not be exchangeable, owing to important differences in effect-modifying factors (for example, specific patient population or study design features); that is, the assumption of transitivity may become more difficult to defend. Accordingly, authors are encouraged to report relevant information on potentially influential patient and study characteristics to inform readers' judgments about the assumption of transitivity. Arguments in favor of defining the evidence base in a way that maximizes the plausibility of transitivity have been outlined elsewhere (18, 69), however, these are not shared by all meta-analysts. Known and well-validated effect modifiers are sparse in the medical literature, and therefore many meta-analysts feel that it is important to be maximally inclusive and allow the meta-analysisto explore for the presence of differences in effect sizes due to differences in potential effect modifiers.
Guidance from the PRISMA statement regarding description of the information sources for a systematic reviewremains relevant for the reporting of network meta-analyses.
Guidance from the original PRISMA statement applies.
The guidance provided in the PRISMA statement remains applicable for network meta-analyses. Authors may also report whether additional information regarding possible effect modifiers was collected. This may be especially important in network meta-analyses involving interventions whose corresponding evidence base spans a broad time frame where co-interventions (or other aspects of care), diagnostic criteria, or other aspects of the patient population may have changed over time. Providing clarity of such information to readers will enhance their ability to appraise the validity of the network meta-analysis.
Describe the methods used to evaluate the geometry of the network of evidence and potential biases related to it. This should include how the evidence base has been graphically summarized.
We analyzed published and unpublished randomized trials performed in patients with pulmonary hypertension. At the level of drug classes, we examined whether head-to-head comparisons are between agents in the same class or between agents in different classes. At the level of companies, we examined whether trials involve only agents (as active comparators or backbones) owned by the same company, or include treatments by different companies. In the networks of drug comparisons, each drug is drawn by a node and randomized comparisons between drugs are shown by links between the nodes. When a drug is compared against the same agent in different dose or formulation, this is represented by an auto-loop. In the networks of companies, nodes stand for companies and auto-loops around these nodes represent trials involving agents of a single company. Links between different nodes characterize trials comparing agents that belong to different companies. (70)
This new checklist item recommends that authors reporting network meta-analyses should evaluate the geometry(71) of the network (Appendix Box 4). Generation of a network graph is important and is of considerable help in reviewing network geometry. The graphical representation of all comparisons can help to determine whether a network meta-analysisis feasible (for example, whether the network of interventions is connected), and whether the network contains closed loops of treatments such that inconsistency (the agreement between the effects estimated from direct and indirect sources) can be assessed (Appendix Box 3)(72–74). The assessment of geometry can be qualitative (that is, a narrative summary of these features) and can optionally be supplemented with quantitative measures described elsewhere (33, 75) (Appendix Box 4).
Network Geometry and Considerations for Bias
Considerations can be made to address networks according to classes based on mechanism of action, line of treatment, sponsorship (as described in the above example), or other sources that may reflect biases on the choice of treatment comparisons made. For example, drug sponsors have little incentive to compare agents other than those they manufacture (76–78); drug treatments may not be compared against surgical or invasive treatments because they are used by different specialists (79); and first-line treatments, such as neglected tropical diseases, may not be adequately compared against each other (73).
As in the original PRISMA statement, researchers are encouraged to describe the level of assessment for each included study (at the study level itself, or for each outcome within the study) and the assessment tool used (for example, the Cochrane Risk of Bias Scale [80]). They should also mention how findings from risk of bias assessments will be used to inform data analyses and interpretation.
As outlined in the PRISMA statement, the chosen summary measures of effect to express comparisons between interventions (for example, odds ratios or mean differences) should be specified (81). Because the number of included studies can be considerably larger in network meta-analysesthan in traditional meta-analyses, and because a single analysis can generate considerably more pairwise comparisons, modified approaches to summarize findings may be required and should be mentioned in the methods section of the review (see item 21, which includes examples of treatment-level forest plots, league tables, and others). Additional summary measures of interest, such as treatment rankings or surface under the cumulative ranking curve (Appendix Box 1), may be described in the main text or supplements as deemed appropriate. Guidance about how to draw interpretations for all summary measures should be provided.
For each pairwise comparison and each outcome at each time point, we used odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) as a measure of the association between the treatment used and efficacy. As the outcomes are negative, ORs >1 correspond to beneficial treatment effects of the first treatment compared with the second treatment.
As a measure that reflects ranking and the uncertainty, we used the Surface Under the Cumulative RAnking curve (SUCRA) as described in Salanti 2011. This measure, expressed as percentage, showed the relative probability of an intervention being among the best options. (82)
Conventional effect measures (such as mean differences and odds ratios) that are also used in pairwise meta-analysisare the primary measures of comparative efficacy between pairwise comparisons of interventions. These should be reported with an associated measure of uncertainty, typically 95% CIs for frequentist analyses and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) for Bayesian analyses. An additional output of network meta-analysis may be a relative ranking of the competing interventions included in the meta-analysis. If authors include rankings, they need to describe the approaches and measures used to rank the treatments and how findings based on these measures are interpreted (Appendix Box 1). Reviewers who evaluate more than 1 outcome are encouraged to report the relative ranking for every outcome.
Similar to guidance from the PRISMA statement, authors should keep in mind that differences in relative effects do not necessarily imply clinical or policy relevance. As such, reporting absolute differences alongside relative measures of effect may aid in interpretation of findings. Regarding probabilities associated with treatment rankings, authors are encouraged to report not only the probability of each intervention being best, but also a more complete presentation of rankings that includes the probability of being second best, third best, and so forth. This provides a picture of the uncertainty associated with the rankings.
Although much of the guidance from the PRISMA statement applies, additional information is needed to enable complete understanding or replication of a network meta-analysis. In addition, the PRISMA statement did not discuss the reporting of considerations for Bayesian meta-analyses (Appendix Box 2).
The network meta-analysis was based on a bayesian random effects Poisson regression model, which preserves randomised treatment comparisons within trials. The model uses numbers of patients experiencing an event and accumulated patient years to estimate rate ratios. The specification of nodes in the network was based on the randomised intervention or in case of strategy trials, such as COURAGE [Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation] or FAME-2 [Fractional flow reserve versus Angiography for Multi-Vessel Evaluation], on the intervention received by the majority of patients in a trial arm. Analyses were performed using Markov-Chain Monte-Carlo methods. The prior distribution for treatment effects was minimally informative: a normal distribution with a mean of 1 and a 95% reference range from 0.01 to 100 on a rate ratio scale. The prior for the between trial variance τ2, which we assumed to be equal across comparisons, was based on empirical evidence derived from semi-objective outcomes of head to head comparisons: a log normal distribution with a geometric mean of τ2 of 0.04 and a 95% reference range from 0.001 to 1.58. Rate ratios were estimated from the median and corresponding 95% credibility intervals from the 2.5th and 97.5th centiles of the posterior distribution. Convergence was deemed to be achieved if plots of the Gelman-Rubin statistics indicated that widths of pooled runs and individual runs stabilised around the same value and their ratio was around 1. (83)
Many network meta-analyses to date have used Bayesian methods for 2 reasons. First, much of the initial development of the technique (as well as related software) used a Bayesian approach. Second, Bayesian methods are often practical in complex or sparse data problems when non-Bayesian (frequentist) methods are not. Recently, statisticians have implemented non-Bayesian techniques in statistical software packages, such as Stata and R (84–85). It is important to justify the assumptions made for the analyses for the inferential method used.
Regardless of the chosen approach, it is important to check that the model fits the data well. Bayesian models often make use of the deviance information criterion to compare models and assess overall goodness of fit (86). Non-Bayesian models often use hypothesis tests based on deviance statistics. Users of Bayesian models must describe and justify the prior distributions used and describe the method by which they checked for convergence of the Markov chain if using a Markov-chain Monte Carlo simulation of the posterior distribution (86–87). Authors are also encouraged to report on additional considerations, including whether arm-based or contrast-based analyses are used, whether study effects are considered to be fixed or random, and so forth.
When performing a network meta-analysis, we rely on the assumption of consistency of treatment effects (that is, the equivalency of treatment effects from direct and indirect evidence [Appendix Box 3]) across the different comparisons in the network.
Consistency was mainly assessed by the comparison of the conventional network meta-analysis model, for which consistency is assumed, with a model that does not assume consistency (a series of pairwise meta-analyses analysed jointly). If the trade-off between model fit and complexity favoured the model with assumed consistency, this model was preferred. Moreover, we calculated the difference between direct and indirect evidence in all closed loops in the network; inconsistent loops were identified with a significant (95% CrI that excludes 0) disagreement between direct and indirect evidence. A loop of evidence is a collection of studies that links treatments to allow for indirect comparisons; the simplest loop is a triangle formed by three direct comparison studies with shared comparators. (88)
It is generally recommended to evaluate the consistency assumption by using both global and local approaches (Appendix Box 3). At the network level, one can check this assumption statistically by fitting a pair of related network meta-analysis models and comparing how well they fit to the data: one analysis wherein the model assumes consistency of direct and indirect evidence, and a second where the model does not make this assumption. Deviance information criteria can be used as mentioned earlier to consider model fit (19). If the models have a similar fit to the data, one can argue that consistency seems to hold.
To judge local consistency for particular contrasts of interventions that are part of a closed loop, one can use the method of Bucher and colleagues (89), or the node (or edge) splitting models presented by Dias and associates (16). The method of Bucher and colleagues assesses inconsistency in every available closed loop in the network separately and tests whether differences in treatment effects from direct and indirect evidence are present. Providing readers with a description of findings from an investigation to explore for inconsistency in the treatment network is important in order to shed light on the appropriateness of the assumption of consistency of evidence, which has implications for determining strength of confidence in the overall findings.
Guidance from the PRISMA statement applies. Authors should describe efforts taken to assess the risk of bias of included studies that may affect the cumulative evidence under study. Classical methods used to assess the risk of bias of included studies, such as use of the Cochrane Risk of Bias Scale, remain relevant and should be considered for each pairwise comparison in the treatment network; traditional approaches to presenting this information, as well as emerging approaches, such as color representation of bias in network diagrams (90), are possible. Given the complex structure of a network, identification of publication bias is more complex in a network meta-analysisowing to limited numbers of studies for each pairwise comparison, heterogeneity, and other limitations. Methods have been proposed that extend tests: for example, asymmetry testing and excess significance from pairwise meta-analyses also in the network space. The applicability of tests that evaluate the entire network has to be carefully considered in each network (91–93).
The PRISMA statement notes that authors should describe all additional analyses that are performed to elucidate the robustness of primary findings, including meta-regressions, subgroup analyses, and sensitivity analyses. These and other efforts undertaken to establish the robustness of findings of a network meta-analysisshould be described.
We considered how decisions to group glaucoma treatments could affect the transitivity assumption and interpretation of the analysis. (27) [See Appendix Figure 1.]
Example figures: alternative geometries of a network of interventions for glaucoma.
Example of alternative geometries of a treatment network for the treatment of glaucoma based on the splitting (A) versus lumping (B) of treatment regimens in the treatment network. A sensitivity analysis considering alternative geometries should be considered when lumping treatment nodes. Depending on quantity, results may be best in appendices. APRAC = apraclonidine; BETAX = betaxolol; BIMAT = bimatoprost;BRIM = brimonidine; BRIN = brinzolamide; CART = carteolol; DOR = dorzolamide; NO TRT = no treatment; NR = not reported; LATAN = latanoprost; LEVO = levobudolol; PL = placebo; TIMO = timolol; TRAV = travoprost.
We a priori had selected allocation concealment, assessor blinding, treatment fidelity and imputation of numbers of responders as potentially important effect modifiers to be examined in sensitivity analyses to limit the included studies to those at low risk of bias. We conducted additional meta-regression analyses using random effects network meta-regression models to examine potential effect moderators such as the mean age of participants, the type of rating scales (clinician-rated versus self-rated), publication status (published versus dissertation), and therapy format (individual vs group). (94)
Random effects network meta-analyses with informative priors for heterogeneity variances were conducted for the analyses. We also conducted fixed and random effects models with vague priors. (95)
Various types of sensitivity analyses may be conducted to study the robustness of findings from a network meta-analysis. For example, network meta-analysis may be conducted by using alternative formulations of the treatment network, as in the example above. These analyses may potentially change clinical interpretations. If analyzed with Bayesian models, results may be sensitive to the specification of prior distributions, particularly for variance parameters (39). Sensitivity and subgroup analyses, as well as meta-regression models adjusting for covariates (34), also can affect findings. These alternative models should be described and the sensitivity of results to them reported. Although these analyses should be noted in the main text, the results may, if extensive, need to be reported in supplements.
The treatments of interest in a network meta-analysisshould be specified a priori. However, peripheral treatments may be included if, for example, they are a standard reference treatment not of direct interest that can connect an otherwise sparse network. Empirical evidence suggests that inclusion or exclusion of treatment nodes can affect estimates and treatment rankings (32).
Unless there is a clinical or analytical requirement in reference to the PICOS summary of the research question, the primary analysis should be restricted to specific doses of treatments and cotreatments. This is because lumping of different doses or cotreatments can introduce heterogeneity and inconsistency (96). However, as described earlier where a class effect may be considered, or different doses are considered to have the same efficacy, sensitivity analyses should be reported that take into account the alternative geometries.
Meta-regression analyses and subgroup analyses represent commonly used approaches to evaluating the effect of potential effect modifiers in traditional meta-analyses and remain applicable for network meta-analyses. The existing literature surveys methods for performing meta-regression analyses by using study-level covariates in network meta-analysis(20, 44), whereas subgroup analyses addressing the effect of effect modifiers, such as study-specific risk of bias (for example, low versus moderate to high risk of bias) or date of publication (for example, publication before versus after a particular year of interest), can be performed by repeating the analysis after limiting the network to include only studies meeting the criteria of interest.
Bayesian analyses should address choice of the prior distribution by reporting sensitivity analyses, particularly for variance parameters, which often have a large effect on results (39, 97).
As noted in the original PRISMA statement, there should be clear specification of the number of studies screened from the literature search, screened for eligibility from full-text reports, and subsequently included in the systematic review, with a corresponding flow diagram to summarize the study selection process
A network meta-analysis comparing all interventions of interest forms a network of treatments that are connected to each other on the basis of the pattern of comparisons made among the trials included in the review. The treatment comparisons for which trial data exist for an outcome of interest should be presented and summarized in a graph that enables readers to easily appraise the structure of existing evidence.
Appendix Figure 2 shows a network graph comparing antipsychotic agents for prevention of schizophrenia relapse (12).
Example figure: presentation of network graph on antipsychotics for schizophrenia relapse.
The size of treatment nodes reflects the number of patients randomly assigned to each treatment. The thickness of edges represents the number of studies underlying each comparison.
Figure 1 shows a generic example of a network graph that introduces its use as a visualization tool. The network graph in Appendix Figure 2 shows the evidence base comparing 9 treatments for prevention of relapse of schizophrenia (12). As mentioned earlier, the size of the treatment nodes reflects the proportionate numbers of patients randomly assigned to each of the treatments, whereas edge thickness indicates the number of studies supporting each comparison. Such visualizations can be generated by using statistical software, such as Stata and R (90), and can provide readers with insights on the evidence base under study (that is, the network geometry); these insights are discussed in items S1 and S4 and Appendix Box 4. It is optimal to illustrate these figures with as few overlapping lines as possible in order to facilitate interpretations regarding the network geometry. Network graphs can provide insight into parts of the evidence base that are informed by small versus large amounts of data, and thus can inform the consideration of interventions that may benefit from further research in terms of accumulating additional evidence.
In cases where the network is small (for example, networks of 3 treatments for which data are present for all comparisons), provision of a table of the data and a short narrative description may be sufficient. Proportionate sizing of nodes and edges in a network diagram may not be desirable in cases where there are large divergences in the numbers of patients and studies across interventions, because they may produce network graphs that are difficult to interpret.
Provide a summary of the structure of the evidence base constructed from study selection.
A total of 2,545 pulmonary hypertension patients received active pulmonary hypertension medication. The studied agents were more commonly bosentan (n = 13 trials; patients receiving treatment = 633) and sildenafil (n = 13 trials; patients receiving treatment = 593). Placebo was used as the comparator arm in 38 studies (patients receiving placebo = 1,643). Of the patients that received placebo, 52 participants were part of crossover studies with sildenafil. The most frequently used comparisons were bosentan versus placebo (n = 11) and sildenafil versus placebo (n = 11). Studies that used placebo as the comparator arm (n = 38) were for the most part sponsored by the pharmaceutical company that owned the product (n = 28 studies [74%]). The only two published head-to-head comparisons of different medications (sildenafil against bosentan) were not sponsored by pharmaceutical companies, but by the British Heart Foundation and the Italian Health Authority. (70)
Such geometry features as identification of a lack of information in relation to specific treatments and comparisons in the network should be described. Evaluations of network geometry may suggest specific biases related to the choice of treatments to be tested, their preferred (or avoided) comparisons, the effect of sponsoring on the selection of treatments and comparisons, and other biases that might affect the geometry of the network. These biases may have important implications for the strength of interpretation of the evidence.
Authors may choose whether to report specific measures of geometry described in Appendix Box 4. The graphical presentation of a network (for example, Appendix Figure 3 ) can be supplemented with a table (or text) describing the number of patients, number of studies, and number of events for each comparison or node. In instances where there are low numbers of events or low power, results should be interpreted with caution (38). In these instances, alternative network configurations may be considered (for example, lumping of interventions). Additional empirical work to clarify the role of network structure for interpreting findings from network meta-analyses is likely to be helpful and may lead to more specific reporting guidance in the future.
Example figure: network geometry of published and unpublished randomized studies on U.S. Food and Drug Administration–approved medications for pulmonary hypertension.
Each intervention is shown by a circular node, with the same color used to group interventions which belong to the same drug class. An auto-loop represents studies where different doses of the same medication have been compared. IV = intravenous; SC = subcutaneous.
As reflected in the PRISMA statement, authors should present the characteristics of all included trials (PICOS-related information, study time frame, sample size, patient demographics) in the systematic review. This still applies to reviews that evaluate a network of treatments. This is commonly accomplished through both a summary in the main text and tables that provide detailed information for all included studies. Authors may wish to structure information tables by using subheadings such that subgroups of trials included in the treatment network are presented together (for example, all A versus B trials, then all A versus C trials). Authors should especially try to report effect modifiers collected to monitor for variations in treatment effects that may have arisen owing to broad time frames of research, because these may be particularly important in judging the appropriateness of the transitivity assumption.
Because systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses will often include data from studies of many different comparisons and many studies, authors should plan to make use of supplemental appendices (as described in a section below) in order to provide readers with adequate information for review of study characteristics.
As outlined in the PRISMA statement, we recommend that findings from risk of bias assessment of the included studies be reported at the level of the individual study, and not only in terms of aggregate counts of studies at lower or higher risk of bias. A summary of bias assessments presented in a table or graph format remains most convenient, and because network meta-analyses commonly include a large number of studies, this may be most simply summarized in an online supplemental appendix to the main report. An additional consideration may be to also present a network graph incorporating risk of bias coloring, as is commonly used in Cochrane systematic reviews (for example, where green indicates low risk of bias, red high risk of bias, and yellow unclear risk of bias) to demonstrate the perceived level of risk within different parts of the treatment network (90).
The PRISMA statement recommends that for each outcome studied, the summary outcome data for each study's intervention groups (such as number of events and sample size for binary outcomes, and mean, standard deviation, and sample size for continuous outcomes) be provided. Use of a forest plot is recommended as ideal for traditional meta-analyses. Some modifications are needed for systematic reviewsincorporating a network meta-analysis.
The Appendix Table presents an example of one possible approach to provision of data on mortality observed with five different interventions for treatment of left ventricular dysfunction (medical resynchronisation, cardiac resynchronisation, implantable defibrillator, combined resynchronisation and defibrillator, and amiodarone) as described elsewhere (98).
For network meta-analysesin which many studies and many treatments may be considered, provision of outcome data at the study level in a forest plot or table in the main text may be unwieldy. Authors may alternatively report this information in one of several possible formats by using an online supplemental Web appendix (see the section on this topic below). This could include a table of data by study, provision of the data sets used for network meta-analyses (as shown in the example), or provision of forest plots that may have been prepared to study information within each of the edges of the treatment network. The sample tabular approach presented in the Appendix Table is intuitive; however, it can be inconvenient when dealing with many treatments or when outcomes are not counts, and varied approaches may be required.
The PRISMA statement advocates reporting of the main results of the review, including findings from meta-analyses and the corresponding measures of heterogeneity. This guidance applies to reviews incorporating network meta-analyses, although some additions beyond conventional practice for pairwise meta-analysis are needed given the potentially sizable increase in the amount of data to present.
Two examples of reporting of comparative treatment efficacy from a review comparing efficacy of treatments for multiple sclerosis with regard to progression of disability are presented in Appendix Figures 4 and 5(82).
Example figure: league table presenting network meta-analysis estimateslower triangle) and direct estimates (upper triangle) of efficacy (disability progression over 36 months) of immunomodulators and immunosuppressants for multiple sclerosis.
Treatments are reported in order of relative ranking for efficacy. Comparisons between treatments should be read from left to right, and their odds ratio is in the cell in common between the column-defining treatment and the row-defining treatment. Odds ratios less than 1 favor the column-defining treatment for the network estimates and the row-defining treatment for the direct estimates. IFN = interferon.
Example figure: forest plot for efficacy (disability progression over 36 months) of immunomodulators and immunosuppressants for multiple sclerosis versus placebo.
Summary estimates are reported for only a subset of all possible pairwise comparisons, namely active interventions versus placebo. Treatments are ranked according to their surface under the cumulative ranking values. OR = odds ratio; CrI = credible interval; IFN =interferon.
Reviews comparing 2 interventions commonly contain forest plots which present 1) the summary measures of effect for each included trial, and 2) the summary measure of effect generated by meta-analyzing data from the included trials (supplemented with outcome data from each trial, I2 values quantifying statistical heterogeneity between study-level summary measures, and so forth). Network meta-analyses may include large numbers of treatments (and thus many pairwise comparisons to summarize) as well as studies (and thus a burdensome number of study-level summaries to present).


text:
Check out the latest gear & LTD colors from North St.
Bookbag, laptop case, backpack, or rucksack—we don't care what you call it. The Belmont is the perfect companion for light duty trips anywhere. Commute to the office, café, market, or to the top of your favorite dayhike, the Belmont makes hauling your most essential gear easy and it looks good doing the job.
A drawstring closure and a flaptop secured with 2 buckles, provides quick access while keeping the elements at bay. Featuring an X-Pac™ waterproof liner, with reflective accents, zippered front and open side pockets, the Belmont is built with a military-grade 1000 denier CORDURA® nylon shell in whatever color combo you choose.
Handmade in-house, Lifetime warranty, Made in Portland, Oregon.View full product details
The perfect diaper bag, picnic buddy, beach bum companion, and general utility carryall, the Tabor Extra Large Tote can probably carry more than you can. Big enough for ski boots, a wetsuit, or your climbing ropes, this giant all purpose tote is the answer to the question of "how are we going to bring all of this along?"
1000 denier Cordura Nylon construction with a nylon packcloth drop liner for weather resistance. Interior pocket for keys and smaller items.
63 liters of stowage is a lot.
Whether working out, hanging out, or simply getting out, active folks tend to get wet. Sweat, water, and mud all make a day great. That is until they end up on the inside of your bag and ruin everything inside. There are few things worse than finding your dry change of clothes soaked down the road.
Introducing the Buckman Gear Bags. Made from waterproof X-Pac™ VX21 ripstop nylon sailcloth. With inside seams bound tight and a handy drawstring closure, these water resistant bags are built to keep the gear inside your bag organized and dry. Also folds down to fit in the palm of your hand.
Keep your swimming trunks stowed. Muddy mountain bike shoes separate. Soaked rain pants are no problem on their own. The Buckman Gear Bags are built to keep your gear dry and ready to use.
Built with:
X-Pac™ Care Instructions:
You travel the world. You're away from home, perhaps away from your family. All you have to depend on is yourself and your luggage.
Made from tough 1000 denier Cordura® nylon and lined with our signature waterproof X-PacTM sailcloth, your essentials will remain intact and dry when stowed inside.
The SCOUT 21 is our largest duffle bag. Carry everything your need for long excursions with this travel lifemate. Safaris, slow sea passages, or extended treks are easily managed if you have the comforts of home by your side. Don't forget your mini travel bar, world band radio, or ukulele. Bring them along in style.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Samsung could release a pair of smartphones early next year capable of bending and folding in half "like a cosmetic compact," without damage, and one of them should be a five-inch model that could be opened to an eight-inch tablet size, Bloomberg reported this morning, citing unnamed people familiar with the project. さらに294語
タグ » Galaxy S
Galaxy S7 a new Gamer's Phone?
Another year has come and another Galaxy S will be released soon. Every year seems like cellphone companies compete with each other to release the best of the best, not just cellphones but TV's and other electronics. さらに351語
Samsung Shows Galaxy 'A' Series; 4 Inch iPhone May Drop in Early 2016
The updated Samsung Galaxy S smartphones will probably bow in 90 days or so, but they have just previewed the 'A' series. The next gen Galaxy A3, A5, and A7 feature faster charging, support for Samsung Pay, and upgraded cameras. さらに125語
The Stagefright exploit is definitely not a minor problem, and it potentially affects basically any device going back to the early years of Android. But thankfully, Sprint has been pretty on top of pushing out fixes for as many devices as possible. さらに140語


text:
Is your resume in need of a little disruption?
Startups are all about
making things work better.
Our resume writing service is all about doing that for your CV.
StartUpHire is the place to find Development-Engineer jobs in and near . Review the list below of Development-Engineer jobs. These Development-Engineer jobs represent some of the most rewarding careers available. You can refine your job search for Development-Engineer jobs in by adding a job title, company name, or keyword to the search box above … or click the "Advanced Search" link for more options. Don't see the employment opportunity you're looking for? Check back soon for more Development-Engineer jobs in , or sign up for an email alert (link in upper left) to receive periodic updates on new Development-Engineer jobs in , .
Departments: Engineering Locations: We have a world-class development team, and we're looking for someone to come in and help build an infrastructure that will help our developers be more efficient. Responsibilities: Design CI/CD processes in the context of a Jenkins7/21/2016 Menlo Park, CA Save This Job
Engineering Lead QA Engineer Posted Apply Now In this role you will be responsible for ensuring product quality all the way from design to production, on an ongoing basis. PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES Be a key player in the effort to make the product deliver the absolute best7/21/2016 Dallas, TX Save This Job
San Francisco We're looking for a talented and experienced iOS engineer to help deliver delight to our customers. Our iOS team is small: only three people do all the development, design, and maintenance of our app. We want you to join this team! Requirements Bachelor's degree7/21/2016 San Francisco, CA Save This Job
IT/Engineering Irvine, CA APPLY NOW Send Jobvite Position Summary: The Systems Engineer performs a broad range of activities to include the effective provisioning, installation, configuration, administration, and maintenance of all technology systems and may act as a project7/20/2016 Irvine, CA Save This Job
at AnchorFree Inc. Menlo Park AnchorFree?s mission is to provide secure and private access to the world?s information for every person on the planet. AnchorFree?s Hotspot Shield app is the world?s most popular freedom and privacy platform. Hotspot Shield is the starting point,7/20/2016 Menlo Park, CA Save This Job
Requisition Number16-0359 Post Date6/30/2016 TitleApplication Support Engineer CityBerwyn StatePA Description Envestnet is a leading independent provider of technology-enabled, web-based investment solutions and services to financial advisors. Our centrally-hosted technology7/20/2016 Berwyn, PA Save This Job
Achronix Semiconductor is an emerging growth company that offers industry leading, high-density and high-performance application-targeted field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs). Achronix is constantly seeking intelligent, highly motivated, and dynamic individuals experienced in7/20/2016 Santa Clara, CA Save This Job
Roswell, GA Apply View All Jobs Share This Job About Core Security Are you someone who thrives in a fast paced, team environment? Do you like being on the leading edge of technology? If so then come join our innovative, driven, and remarkable team of cyber-security7/20/2016 Roswell, GA Save This Job
Job ID: 20160111-6699-SH Company Name: 3E Company Description: 3E Company is currently hiring for a Solutions Engineer. This position can be based in Carlsbad, CA; Canton, OH or Bethesda, MD. What 3E has to offer? To work with a collaborative team To join an industry7/20/2016 Bethesda, MD Save This Job
Requisition Number16-0130 Post Date7/8/2016 TitleSystems Engineer (A07) CityLouisville StateKY DescriptionSummary Performs IT functions such as design, analysis, evaluation, testing, debugging and implementation of applications programs in support of one or more functional areas7/20/2016 Louisville, KY Save This Job
The Federal Sr. Sales Engineer will combine technical knowledge with sales skills and is ultimately responsible for the technical win in the sales cycle. Sales Engineers are the primary technical resource for the field sales force hence, they are responsible for actively driving7/19/2016 Newton, MA Save This Job
Professional Services Irving, TX, United StatesApply Now IT Security is a big deal. It?s in the news, growing rapidly, a critical tool for every company, and our specialty. Now is the time to be part of an organization that is changing the game. We are the ONLY company in the7/19/2016 Irving, TX Save This Job
Location:United States - Houston Department:Engineering Development - CTO Description Alert Logic, the leader in security and compliance solutions for the cloud, provides Security-as-a-Service for on-premises, cloud, and hybrid infrastructures, delivering deep security insight7/19/2016 Houston, TX Save This Job
Engineering Austin, TX, United States Apply Send Jobvite SailPoint is the Worldwide Leader for Enterprise-Class IAM We minimize risk and maximize business growth by managing access to data and resources across your enterprise. We do it effectively and securely for every person7/19/2016 Austin, TX Save This Job
Quality Assurance Seattle, WA, United States Who: In order to be successful in today?s increasingly mobile environment, companies need consistent connectivity ? and the tools to maintain it ? that?s where NetMotion comes in. Our Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) software7/18/2016 Seattle, WA Save This Job
Description Reservoir Engineer with 2-3 years? experience. The candidate must come with a sound technical knowledge of analytical reservoir engineering approaches with deep knowledge of the reservoir simulation software. Must also be a ?hands on? team player with enough drive7/15/2016 Houston, TX Save This Job
Level: Experienced The Software Engineer will be engaged with all technical production of our products. We?re looking for a full-time, senior level software programmer with experience with long-running installations and events who can captain projects from concept to install.7/15/2016 Los Angeles, CA Save This Job
SF This position requires the ability to engage with both Marketing and Technical teams to define and implement technical solutions for advanced custom email programs. Responsibilities of the Solutions Engineer: Deliver powerful email marketing solutions for a wide range of7/14/2016 San Francisco, CA Save This Job
Location: Chicago, IL Department: Sales Type: Full Time Min. Experience: Experienced Description: Want to be part of the next big thing? Join Big Switch Networks! We?re seeking a smart, talented, and fun person to explore new networking challenges. Why join Big Switch? ?7/14/2016 Chicago, IL Save This Job
Location: Santa Clara, CA Department: Engineering Type: Full Time Min. Experience: Experienced Description: Want to be part of the next big thing? Join Big Switch Networks! We?re seeking a smart, talented, and fun person to be a Open Network Linux guru. Why join Big Switch? ?7/14/2016 Santa Clara, CA Save This Job


text:
Ivy + Bean: No News Is Good News: Ivy + Bean, Book 8
What parents need to know
Parents Need to Know
Parents need to know that Ivy + Bean: No News Is Good News, Book 8 of the popular Ivy + Bean series, has a few very minor instances of mischievous behavior (playing with fire with a magnifying glass, pretending to be dead, and spying on neighbors to write about them for a community newspaper). However, it's all done with a very light touch and lots of humor, and the girls ultimately learn some lessons about the lines they've crossed.
What's the story?
Everyone at lunch has low-fat Belldeloon cheese in single servings, and more important, they get to play with the red wax coating that can be molded into a thousand different shapes and uses. But Ivy and Bean can't get their hands on the expensive cheese until they score $10. To do that, they'll have to earn it, and when one of their fathers suggests collecting money for creating a neighborhood newspaper, they think they've hit the jackpot of easy money. Only now, they actually have to produce the newspaper, and what's more, the neighbors will read it!
Is it any good?
The eighth book in the Ivy + Bean series is by turns funny, relatable, heartwarming, silly, and prankish. It's an engaging read for young girls, with delicate black-and-white pencil drawings that portray the title characters' trials, tribulations, and fascinations with realism and wit. This book celebrates differences and girl friendship -- Ivy is quiet, Bean is loud, and in spite of their best efforts to resist their parents' urge to pair them together as friends, they realize they really do like each other.
Readers will find a sidesplitting adventure that speaks their language, and parents can appreciate that this is the sort of book series that fosters a deep love of reading and sparks curiosity.
Families can talk about...
Families can talk about boundaries. Have you ever crossed a boundary you shouldn't have? What happened? How did the situation turn out?
Do you ever see stories in the newspaper or on the news that feel like they invade the privacy of the subject? How can the media be more respectful of the lives of the people they cover?
Do you earn an allowance? If so, what does it teach you? If not, do you think it's a good idea? What tasks or responsibilities do you have?
Book details
|Annie Barrows
|Sophie Blackall
|For Beginning Readers
|Adventures, Friendship, Great girl role models
|Book type:
|Chronicle Books
|Publication date:
|November 2, 2011
|Number of pages:
|Publisher's recommended age(s):
|6 - 10
|Available on:
|Paperback, Nook, Audiobook (unabridged), Hardback, iBooks, Kindle
|ALA Best and Notable Books
About Our Rating System
Great handpicked alternatives
A sure hit with kids starting chapter books.age 6+
Ramona tale helps young kids build empathy.age 7+
A timeless classic with the fab Ramona!age 9+
For kids who love great chapter books and cool girl characters
Browse more books
What parents and kids say
A safe community is important to us. Please observe our guidelines
There aren't any reviews yet. Be the first to review this title.


text:
503,582 deals (and counting)
from around the web, shared and ranked by a community of deal fiends like you.
Go to Deals.Woot.
VIZIO Home Theater Sound Bar w/ SubwooferPrice: $89.99Shipping Options: $5 StandardCondition: Factory ReconditionedComparison Links:Google Products - Amazon - Previous Woot Sales
Item Preview:
Item: VIZIO Home Theater Sound Bar w/ Subwoofer
Price: $89.99
Shipping Options: $5 Standard
Condition: Factory Reconditioned
Read the Blog - Buy It
Search Amazon Search Google
This does not look like a Basket of Cranberries.
Looked it up on Amazon to double check the specs. No optical input on this one, but it gets pretty good reviews otherwise.
Why is WootStalker crashing so much today?
Walmart currently has a sony one for $98
View All →


text:
Samsung SyncMaster 2333SW LCD monitor
Possessing great image quality and loads of style, Samsung's SyncMaster 2333SW is an excellent Full HD monitor
Price$ 549.00 (AUD)
Special Offers
Father's Day Gift Guide
Most Popular Reviews
- 1 2016 Ford Mustang EcoBoost review
- 2 Synology DS216+ Review
- 3 Review: TCL C1 series 4K TV
- 4 Sony 75-inch UHD TV (X9400C) review: Sony and Android are a winning duo
Join the Good Gear Guide newsletter!
Best Deals on Good Gear Guide
Latest News Articles
- Dell's monstrous 70-inch touchscreen monitor takes aim at Microsoft's Surface Hub
- Dell's 4-screen multimonitor setup looks like one enormous 43-inch display
- Foxconn to pay over $US6bn for a majority stake in Sharp
- CES 2016: Top 10 trends
- Kogan forced to pay $32,400 penalty by ACCC
Business Centre
The latest business news, reviews, features and whitepapers
Online Shop
Visit our shop for the best deals on hot products
Watch our video news and reviews from around the world
Comprehensive buying guides, features, and step-by-step articles
GGG Evaluation Team
Kathy Cassidy
First impression on unpacking the Q702 test unit was the solid feel and clean, minimalist styling.
Anthony Grifoni
For work use, Microsoft Word and Excel programs pre-installed on the device are adequate for preparing short documents.
Steph Mundell
The Fujitsu LifeBook UH574 allowed for great mobility without being obnoxiously heavy or clunky. Its twelve hours of battery life did not disappoint.
Andrew Mitsi
The screen was particularly good. It is bright and visible from most angles, however heat is an issue, particularly around the Windows button on the front, and on the back where the battery housing is located.
Simon Harriott
My first impression after unboxing the Q702 is that it is a nice looking unit. Styling is somewhat minimalist but very effective. The tablet part, once detached, has a nice weight, and no buttons or switches are located in awkward or intrusive positions.
Latest Jobs
- FTSocial Media AssistantQLD
- FTAgile Coach / Training & Support ManagerNSW
- FTApplications Support / Systems Administrator | DefenceACT
- CCNetwork Engineer - NV2 ClearanceVIC
- FTSystems Engineer | Defence | NV1 / NV2 clearanceACT
- FTSQL DATA AnalyticsNSW
- CCSenior Systems AdministratorQLD
- FTSharePoint DeveloperNSW
- CCServiceNow Technical LeadNSW
- CCFMW DevelopersACT
- CCContract Analyst Programmer (JAVA/J2EE/SQL) 160726/AP/186Asia
- FTData AnalystACT
- CCContract Analyst Programmer (JAVA/Oracle) 160728/AP/623Asia
- FT1st Level IT Support - Microsoft EnvironmentNSW
- CCVendor ManagerVIC
- CCChange CoordinatorNSW
- FTEmbedded Software EngineerWA
- CCTechnical Architect - CloudNSW
- CCDesktop Engineer (SCCM/SOE)WA
- CCLead Business AnalystNSW
- CCHR Contractor Retail ProjectVIC
- CCEnvironment ManagerVIC
- CCCommunication LeadVIC
- FTService Desk ManagerNSW
- FTApplication Support AnalystSA


text:
Top Definition
Multitasking, usually eating and having sex. Most often used in the context of failing at both tasks.
Bob's nareshov sessions have caused his wife to leave him.
ayon kay Mary 4 Z. ika-05 ng Abril, 2008
Trending Now
Ang mga sulat are galing sa firstname.lastname@example.com. Kailanma'y hindi kami magpapadala ng spam sa inyo.×


text:
Online CPA CPE Courses Enrolled Agent CPE Courses Tax CE Course
CPA CPE Requirements Enrolled Agent CPE Requirements Tax CE Requirements
CPE Provider Credentials Other Products Contact Us
Our online CPA CPE, Enrolled Agent CPE, and tax preparer CPE courses courses include the most up-to-date information, and provide tax and accounting professionals with the knowledge they need to be successful.
Complete your CPA CPE, EA CPE, or tax CPE courses online at your convenience. Did you wait until the last minute? Don't worry! APlusCPE will have your CPE courses reported faster than any other CPE provider.
At APlusCPE, you get premium service without having to pay a premium price. If you are not 100% satisfied with your order, we'll refund your purchase.


text:
Learn more
More Last-Minute Knitted Gifts Hardcover – Sep 1 2010
Amazon Price
|New from
|Used from
Kindle Edition
"Please retry"
"Please retry"
Frequently Bought Together
Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought
No Kindle device required. Download one of the Free Kindle apps to start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, and computer.
Getting the download link through email is temporarily not available. Please check back later.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
Don't have a Kindle? Get your Kindle here, or download a FREE Kindle Reading App.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info, give feedback on images, or tell us about a lower price?
Product Description
From Publishers Weekly
The Cheerios Halloween Play Book by Lee Wade encourages youngsters to reach for the cereal to complete the pictures of black cats with glasses and ghosts shouting "Boo."
Copyright 2001 Cahners Business Information, Inc.--This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
About the Author
Joelle Hoverson is the author of the STC Craft books Last-Minute Knitted Gifts and Last-Minute Patchwork & Quilted Gifts. She is the founder and creative force behind the yarn and fabric store Purl Soho in Manhattan, the website purlsoho.com, and The Purl Bee blog (purlbee.com). She is a former senior style editor for Martha Stewart Omnimedia and holds a master of fine arts degree from Yale.
Customer Reviews
Top Customer Reviews
And then, of course, there is design. Fibers, textures, unusual lines. All these things are important to me. And there a boat-ton of patterns I have in my stash that make full use of all of these lovelies. But you know what? I would have to live to be 500 to make all these things – and sometimes I can't even get the time to make one. Sigh.
With that as the case, I am thrilled to have More Last-Minute Knitted Gifts. Sometimes you need small items for friends, birthday gifts, that sort of thing. And sometimes, when you are really feeling hammered by life, when nothing ever seems to be done and complete, well, being able to finish just one thing can sooth and calm the mind and make life better. This is the perfect book to reach that goal. From the ultra-simple, like the Reusable Hot Coffee-Cup Sleeve – it only takes about an hour to finish – to the Bright Stripes Blanket – 1800 yards of beautiful bright yarn and a longer finish time, but easy-peasy garter stitch – well, I love this little book!
The instructions are clear and Joelle gives ideas for different fibers and colours to make the same item for different people fit each person's personal style. For me, the Toe-Up Socks pattern is going to be my go-to pattern for socks (I run around with just socks on all the time, holes are a given… ). The book also includes excellent instructions for "how-tos," everything from binding on to binding off with Kitchner Stitch.
Highly recommended for everyone from the beginner to the advanced knitter who is looking for simple projects that bring smiles!
I received this book from the publisher in return for a realistic review. All thoughts are my own.
Most recent customer reviews
I'm a new knitter so I'm keen to learn & try new things and this book fills that need. The first item I made was the "pretty lacy scarf" that is knit in the round. Read morePublished on March 11 2014 by Diane M. Schuller


text:
Amarte Me Hace Bien (Audio)
Ordinary People (Live on Letterman)
Boof Baf
If You Want It
Surprise Yourself
Off Peak Dreams
Come To Daddy
Enemy [Live]
Begin Again
The 1969 session, including the only known recording of 'Sunshine Woman' by the band, will be included on a re-issue of 'The Complete BBC Sessions'...
The 55 year old actor joined Chris Martin and co. on stage in New Jersey to perform 'Earth Angel' and 'Johnny B. Goode'.
Bjork Digital comes to London's Somerset House in September, along with a single live show at the Royal Albert Hall.
Kim Kardashian released an audio excerpt from a phone call between Kanye and Taylor Swift over the lyrics of 'Famous' - but if it was recorded...
There's very much a strength of conviction in remaining what you were, but arguably more so in becoming what you want to be.
The BBC drama starring Aidan Turner returns to BBC One on September 4th.
Guns N' Roses were detained at the Canadian border last week for gun possession but they're adamant the weapon didn't belong to them.
Nigerian filmmaker Jeta Amata clearly feels passionate about the problems in his country, but despite...
Imagine you were a marginally successful comedian, one who had spent 10 years touring clubs...
One Last Thing... was another one of those experimental films -- experimental from a business...
Imagine you were a marginally successful comedian, one who had spent 10 years touring clubs...


text:
With over 100 years of experience, PMA Insurance Group is one of the nation's most experienced providers of workers' compensation and other property & casualty insurance products.
PMA is a leading provider of Third-Party Administration (TPA) and Risk Services in the United States, offering a unique, holistic approach to managing clients' total cost of risk.
Thought leadership focused on helping you understand and navigate today's business challenges, delivered through articles, case studies, white papers and more.
PMA Companies Appoints Patricia Brookey Senior Vice President of Managed Care
May 19, 2016
PMA Companies has named Patricia Brookey as Senior Vice President of Managed Care. Previously, Ms. Brookey was PMA's Vice President, Managed Care. She joined the company in 2009, and has nearly three decades of experience in the development and implementation of medical cost containment programs.
PMA Companies Recognizes Expansion Milestone in its Midwest Region
May 11, 2016
PMA Companies has expanded its Midwest regional office in Schaumburg, Illinois. Designed to facilitate continued growth of its Midwest operations, the office now houses all of PMA's Chicago-area marketing and client service operations, and includes space for additional staff during the next few years.
PMA offers a performance-based culture built on respect, pride and a passion for exceeding expectations. Take the first step towards a PMA career today.


text:
"When you accept money in payment for your effort, you do so only on the conviction that you will exchange it for the product of the effort of others. It is not the moochers or the looters who give value to money. Not an ocean of tears nor all the guns in the world can transform those pieces of paper in your wallet into the bread you will need to survive tomorrow. Those pieces of paper which should have been gold, are a token of honor -- your claim upon the energy of the men who produce. Your wallet is your statement of hope that somewhere in the world around you there are men who will not default on that moral principle which is the root of money." ~ Ayn Rand
Liberty Versus Socialism
?The fact that an obese person becomes ill, or a cyclist has an accident, and becomes a burden on taxpayers who must bear the expense of taking care of him, is not a problem of liberty. It's a problem of socialism where one person is forced to take care of another.?
Your rating: None
- Login to post comments
User Login
Search This Site
Recent comments
13 hours 21 min ago
17 hours 5 sec ago
17 hours 11 min ago
1 day 23 hours ago
2 days 1 hour ago
2 days 10 hours ago
3 days 9 hours ago
3 days 13 hours ago
3 days 16 hours ago
3 days 19 hours ago


text:
My husband and I stayed here in mid September and had a great trip. We stayed in D101 and you can find out about this on the homeaway site. Darrell and Roseanne were amazing and really thought of everything needed to make this feel like home. The snorkeling right by is great and we would highly recommend taking a trip on the Breakaway. Choose this condo and you will not be disappointed.
- Reservation Options:
- TripAdvisor is proud to partner with Expedia, BookIt.com, Orbitz, Hotwire, Travelocity and Hotels.com so you can book your Antilles At Sapphire Beach Resort reservations with confidence. We help millions of travelers each month to find the perfect hotel for both vacation and business trips, always with the best discounts and special offers.
- Also Known As:
- Antilles At Sapphire Beach Hotel St. Thomas
- Antilles At Sapphire Beach Resort St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands


text: We Dance To The Beat by robyn published on 2010-09-13T15:54:58Z Body Talk Pt 2 offers the clearest example yet of Robyn's pop prowess; 8 songs that crystallize her preoccupation with hypnotic repetition, propulsive beats and infectious hooks, and lyrics which display the kind of unabashed emotional vulnerability that only comes with true self-confidence. Body Talk PT 2 is further proof that Robyn's understanding and love of pop music is as intrinsic as it is accomplished. Listen here. Genre Pop Comment by Matija Han We dance to the beat of source code and conjuring - YES! 2015/05/25 20:21:29 +0000 Comment by 2200CPH write a comment 2014/11/07 23:02:50 +0000 Comment by Luke Waite 4 It's loud and proud 2014/10/18 21:06:38 +0000 Comment by Irie Soul Robyn i dance to your beat! 2013/05/16 12:47:50 +0000 Comment by Juha Stenberg @skelleteen: Love this part!!! <3 2011/06/21 16:34:24 +0000 Comment by Skelleteen I LOVE THIS!!! ---> LISTEN LISTEN! JUST PERFECT 2011/02/16 04:43:20 +0000 Comment by DJ Evercold @oloffolo: This one does.. ;) 2010/09/13 19:42:49 +0000 Comment by dj ShmeeJay Swedes do it better. 2010/09/13 18:25:33 +0000


text:
"These are the weapons being used for massive human rights violations in key trouble spots around the world."
Related quotes
"Today, no walls can separate humanitarian or human rights crises in one part of the world from national security crises in another. What begins with the failure to uphold the dignity of one life all too often ends with a calamity for entire nations."
"America did not invent human rights. In a very real sense, it is the other way around. Human rights invented America."
"Opportunity means advancing American values in the world by protecting human rights, meeting human needs, and opening global markets."
"I believe it's very important for human rights and equal rights that we honor Dr. Martin Luther King. I believe we shouldn't be open on Martin Luther King Jr. Day. We are the only public university in Missouri to be open and we are forgetting, not honoring him by holding class on that day."


text:
11:19 am
David Bowie
D.A. Pennebaker
Jeff Beck
"I know what kind of welcome you're gonna give to JEFF BECK!"
Although it's widely known—or at least widely known among David Bowie fanatics, MOJO subscribers and guitar otakus—that Jeff Beck was the "special guest" at Ziggy and the Spiders' send-off show at the Hammersmith Odeon on July 3rd, 1973, Beck's cameo appearance was cut from D.A Pennebaker's documentary film of the event, Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars. Beck joined Bowie onstage for a blistering two song encore consisting of "The Jean Genie" and a cover of the Chuck Berry number "Around and Around." There have been several home video releases of the film over the decades and yet none of them have ever restored the Beck footage or even had it as a DVD extra.
It's not 100% clear why Beck insisted that his footage be edited out of the film, but it's most likely to do with him not liking what he was wearing onstage that night. Apparently no one had informed the guitarist that the show was being filmed. Even Mick Ronson, no slouch at the time in the goofy clothes department said of Beck's outfit:
"I was too busy looking at his flares. Even by our standards, those trousers were excessive!"
By the guitar god's own admission, though, it might've been his shoes. In a 2009 interview with The Sunday Times, Beck revealed that it wasn't his massive flares, but rather his footwear ("the most disgusting pair of dirty-white stack-heeled shoes you've ever seen") that was the reason. He wouldn't relent:
"Bowie rang me about 10 times and said, "Look, man, I understand about the shoes, 'cos I didn't like what I was wearing either."
Keep reading after the jump…


text:
Choose The Commercial Cleaning Professionals
Brent & Partners Cleaning is a recognised cleaning provider for offices and corporate buildings in London. We are experts in commercial carpet cleaning, able to remove even the most stubborn stains and dirt. During the years, we developed an outstanding know-how to cover all the cleaning needs of our commercial clients. Call us now and improve your company's image!
Address: 1 King St, London EC2V 8AU, UK
Email: email@example.com
Working hours:
Office: 8:30am - 5:30pm
Call centre: 24/7


text:
2003 mustang cobra svt Brembo Gran Turismo Slotted Brake Kit
Reviewed By Robert B (North Palm Beach, FL) Reviewed for a 2003 Ford Mustang —10/28/2011 6:43 AM
Look's and performance are a perfect 10!!
Reviewed By Gerald A (HOUSTON, TX) Reviewed for a 2013 BMW 3-Series —4/14/2016 9:40 AM
I haven't installed these yet, but they shipped faster than expected, and as described. Should be a straight forward install, and I have only heard good things from friends who have also installed Stoptech kits.


text:
|Product Information
|Air Freshener & Deodorizer Type :
|Scent :
|Meadows and Rain Scent
|Pack Qty :
|Weight :
|7.40 lbs. per Each
See what other informed Quill customers purchased after viewing this product
Can't find what you need? Contact Us
©Quill Lincolnshire, Inc. 2016, All Rights Reserved.
This Web site is intended only for use by U.S. residents.


text:
Oct. 11, 2011
The No. 17 University of Minnesota men's cross country team will travel to Wisconsin this weekend for a pair of races. On Friday, 11 men will be competing in Madison, Wis., at the Wisconsin adidas Invitational. This is a new meet to the Gophers, as in years past they would be racing at the Pre-NCAA Meet. The 8k race, which will be taking place at the Thomas Zimmer Championship Cross Country Course, will be set up into two different divisions, a championship race and a "B" race. The championship race is set to begin at 1:40 p.m. and the "B" race will run at 3 p.m.
On Saturday a few men will be racing at the Jim Drews Invitational. The three runners will be running an 8k race, which will take place at the Maple Grove Country Club, in West Salem, Wis. Over 20 teams from divisions I, II and III will be in attendance. The gun is set to go off at 10:30 a.m. central time.
He is Running at….
Wisconsin adidas Invitational Roster
Travis Burkstrand
Pieter Gagnon
Paul Hilsen *
Andrew Larsen
Hassan Mead
Bob Nicolls
Sean Olson *
Marcus Paulson
Steve Sulkin *
Erik Truedson
Matt Volz *
*Running in the "B" Race
Tori Neubauer Invitational Roster
Blayne Dulian
Kevin Lachowitzer
Derek Storkel
Gophers in the Polls
The men's cross country team has been moving up in the national USTFCCCA poll. Currently the Gophers are ranked No. 17 and were preseason ranked No. 27. Minnesota still stands at No. 3 in the Midwest Regional poll behind Oklahoma State and Oklahoma.
What the Gophers have done so far in 2011…
- Minnesota won the Hornet Jamboree on Sept. 10.
- Pieter Gagnon earned Big Ten Runner of the Week honors after his first place finish at the Hornet Jamboree.
- Minnesota placed third at the 2011 Roy Griak Invitational on Sept. 24
- Hassan Mead earned Big Ten Runner of the Week honors after his third place finish at the Griak.
- The Gophers have moved up ten spots since the preseason polls were released. Minnesota is now No. 17 in the country.
Looking Forward
Minnesota will take the next weekend off before heading to the 2011 Big Ten Championship on Sunday, October 30 at the University of Illinois Arboretum. The Gophers are fired up for this year's championships, as last year they finished third overall and will be looking to move up a few spots.
Griak Feature: Katie Flood
Katie Flood is the only runner in Griak Invitational history to win three individual high school race titles.
Griak, B1G Meet Highlight 2016 Home Schedule
The Gophers will host three meets in 2016 including the Roy Griak Invitational and the 2016 Big Ten Cross Country Championships.
Griak Feature: Missy (Buttry) Rock
The University of Minnesota will celebrate the 31st annual Roy Griak Invitational on Saturday, Sept. 24 at Les Bolstad Golf Course in Falcon Heights, Minn.


text:
Check out the second part of the On The Loose video in the Philippines. In this episode we have ...On 15 November 2011 / By Kitemovement
The On The Loose crew went on a trip to the Philippines, were the first Wind Or No Wind ...On 8 November 2011 / By Kitemovement
After a while of not showing any episodes and keeping things quiet… It is now time to show you ...On 2 November 2011 / By Kitemovement
Who said that women are the weaker sex? Check out some girls wakeskating and wakeboarding at a cable park ...On 8 June 2011 / By Kitemovement
Here comes the final report for KTA's last tour stop of the 2010-11 season, coming to you from the ...On 11 May 2011 / By Kitemovement
The KB4Girls Foundation by Kristin Boese, 9 times World Champion, teamed up with the Kiteboard Tour Asia for a ...On 22 April 2011 / By Kitemovement
Nils Heuman shredding a pilipina style handrail built with help of couple of locals on a remote island in ...On 6 February 2011 / By Kitemovement
The Wind or No Wind Jam was an event designed to show the versatility of a location as well ...On 12 January 2011 / By Kitemovement
Some action of the Kiteboard Tour Asia Open Event in Philippines: kicker comp, expression session style freestyle and course ...On 9 January 2011 / By Kitemovement
Teaser for the forthcoming series of free weekly webisodes available spring 2011 from the Wind Or No Wind Board ...On 23 December 2010 / By Kitemovement
This is the video of Mallory de la Villemarqué and Florian Daubos's trip to Boracay, Philippines. ...On 6 October 2010 / By Kitemovement
This short video was filmed by Asko Elken during a 3 week trip to Boracay, Philippines. Filmed mostly in ...On 4 May 2010 / By Kitemovement
© 2007-2015 KiteMovement. All rights reserved.