PURPOSE: We aimed to provide clinicians with introductory guidance for interpreting and assessing confidence in on Network meta-analysis (NMA) results. METHODS: We reviewed current literature on NMA and summarized key points. RESULTS: Network meta-analysis (NMA) is a statistical method for comparing the efficacy of three or more interventions simultaneously in a single analysis by synthesizing both direct and indirect evidence across a network of randomized clinical trials. It has become increasingly popular in healthcare, since direct evidence (head-to-head randomized clinical trials) are not always available. NMA methods are categorized as either Bayesian or frequentist, and while the two mostly provide similar results, the two approaches are theoretically different and require different interpretations of the results. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend a careful approach to interpreting NMA results and the validity of an NMA depends on its underlying statistical assumptions and the quality of the evidence used in the NMA.