different relative effect result in each run, but with the exact same setting

[ZixiaoChenMcK]

Hi @dmphillippo ,

I was running releff_age_stage_hidden <- relative_effects(fit_re_age_stage_hidden, all_contrasts = TRUE), where fit_re_age_stage_hidden is hidding one trial information, so I can compare if the predicted relative effect from the model matches the true relative effect of the hidden trial. However, I noticed that in each run, although with the exact same setting, the predicted relative effect of that hidden trial is always different. Could you please help me understand why this is the case, is this normal? Thank you!

here is my code set up for more context: """

excluding one trial NCT00021060 in input data

data_demographic_hidden <- data_demographic %>% filter(trial_identifier!="NCT00021060")

setup network

network_demographic_hidden <- set_agd_arm( data_demographic_hidden, study = trial_identifier, trt = treatment, y = NULL, se = NULL, r = response_count, n = person_count, E = NULL, sample_size = person_count, trt_class = NULL )

fit_re_age_stage_hidden <- nma(network_demographic_hidden, trt_effects = "fixed", regression = ~(age_group+disease_stage+biomarker_group)*.trt, prior_intercept = normal(scale = 100), prior_trt = normal(scale = 100), prior_het = half_normal(scale = 5))

releff_age_stage_hidden <- relative_effects(fit_re_age_stage_hidden, all_contrasts = TRUE) """

[dmphillippo]

Hi @ZixiaoChenMcK, yes this is expected.

Since the models are estimated using MCMC sampling the results will be a little different every time due to Monte Carlo error. An estimate of the Monte Carlo error is given in the se_mean column shown in the model output.

You can make the Monte Carlo error arbitrarily small by increasing the number of iterations; the default is iter = 2000 which is usually reasonable. If you provide a larger iter in the nma() function this will be passed along to Stan which does the sampling.