Systematic differences between Cochrane and non-Cochrane meta-analyses on the same topic: a matched pair analysis

BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses conducted via the Cochrane Collaboration adhere to strict methodological and reporting standards aiming to minimize bias, maximize transparency/reproducibility, and improve the accuracy of summarized data. Whether this results in differences in the results reported by meta-analyses on the same topic conducted outside the Cochrane Collaboration is an open question. METHODS: We conducted a matched-pair analysis with individual meta-analyses as the unit of analysis, comparing Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews. Using meta-analyses from the cardiovascular literature, we identified pairs that matched on intervention and outcome. The pairs were contrasted in terms of how frequently results disagreed between the Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews, whether effect sizes and statistical precision differed systematically, and how these differences related to the frequency of secondary citations of those reviews. RESULTS: Our search yielded 40 matched pairs of reviews. The two sets were similar in terms of which was first to publication, how many studies were included, and average sample sizes. The paired reviews included a total of 344 individual clinical trials: 111 (32.3%) studies were included only in a Cochrane review, 104 (30.2%) only in a non-Cochrane review, and 129 (37.5%) in both. Stated another way, 62.5% of studies were only included in one or the other meta-analytic literature. Overall, 37.5% of pairs had discrepant results. The most common involved shifts in the width of 95% confidence intervals that would yield a different statistical interpretation of the significance of results (7 pairs). Additionally, 20% differed in the direction of the summary effect size (5 pairs) or reported greater than a 2-fold difference in its magnitude (3 pairs). Non-Cochrane reviews reported significantly higher effect sizes (P < 0.001) and lower precision (P < 0.001) than matched Cochrane reviews. Reviews reporting an effect size at least 2-fold greater than their matched pair were cited more frequently. CONCLUSIONS: Though results between topic-matched Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews were quite similar, discrepant results were frequent, and the overlap of included studies was surprisingly low. Non-Cochrane reviews report larger effect sizes with lower precision than Cochrane reviews, indicating systematic differences, likely reflective of methodology, between the two types of reviews that could generate different interpretations of the interventions under question

Systematic differences between Cochrane and non-Cochrane meta-analyses on the same topic: a matched pair analysis

BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses conducted via the Cochrane Collaboration adhere to strict methodological and reporting standards aiming to minimize bias, maximize transparency/reproducibility, and improve the accuracy of summarized data. Whether this results in differences in the results reported by meta-analyses on the same topic conducted outside the Cochrane Collaboration is an open question. METHODS: We conducted a matched-pair analysis with individual meta-analyses as the unit of analysis, comparing Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews. Using meta-analyses from the cardiovascular literature, we identified pairs that matched on intervention and outcome. The pairs were contrasted in terms of how frequently results disagreed between the Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews, whether effect sizes and statistical precision differed systematically, and how these differences related to the frequency of secondary citations of those reviews. RESULTS: Our search yielded 40 matched pairs of reviews. The two sets were similar in terms of which was first to publication, how many studies were included, and average sample sizes. The paired reviews included a total of 344 individual clinical trials: 111 (32.3%) studies were included only in a Cochrane review, 104 (30.2%) only in a non-Cochrane review, and 129 (37.5%) in both. Stated another way, 62.5% of studies were only included in one or the other meta-analytic literature. Overall, 37.5% of pairs had discrepant results. The most common involved shifts in the width of 95% confidence intervals that would yield a different statistical interpretation of the significance of results (7 pairs). Additionally, 20% differed in the direction of the summary effect size (5 pairs) or reported greater than a 2-fold difference in its magnitude (3 pairs). Non-Cochrane reviews reported significantly higher effect sizes (P < 0.001) and lower precision (P < 0.001) than matched Cochrane reviews. Reviews reporting an effect size at least 2-fold greater than their matched pair were cited more frequently. CONCLUSIONS: Though results between topic-matched Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews were quite similar, discrepant results were frequent, and the overlap of included studies was surprisingly low. Non-Cochrane reviews report larger effect sizes with lower precision than Cochrane reviews, indicating systematic differences, likely reflective of methodology, between the two types of reviews that could generate different interpretations of the interventions under question

Scan posture definition and hip girth measurement: the impact on clothing design and body scanning

Ergonomic measurement is central to product design and development; especially for body worn products and clothing. However, there is a large variation in measurement definitions, complicated by new body scanning technology that captures measurements in a posture different to traditional manual methods. Investigations of hip measurement definitions in current clothing measurement practices supports analysis of the effect of scan posture and hip measurement definition on the circumferences of the hip. Here, the hip girth is a key clothing measurement that is not defined in current body scanning measurement standards. Sixty-four participants were scanned in the standard scan posture of a [TC] 2 body scanner, and also in a natural posture similar to that of traditional manual measurement collection. Results indicate that scan posture affects hip girth circumferences, and that some current clothing measurement practices may not define the largest lower body circumference. Recommendations are made concerning how the hip is defined in measurement practice and within body scanning for clothing product development. Practitioner Summary: The hip girth is an important measurement in garment design, yet its measurement protocol is not currently defined. We demonstrate that body posture during body scanning affects hip circumferences, and that current clothing measurement practices may not define the largest lower body circumference. This paper also provides future measurement practice recommendations

Site selective reading of epigenetic markers by a dual-mode synthetic receptor array.

Variably functionalized self-folding deep cavitands form an arrayed, fluorescent indicator displacement assay system for the detection of post-translationally modified (PTM) histone peptides. The hosts bind trimethyllysine (KMe3) groups, and use secondary upper rim interactions to provide more sensitive discrimination between targets with identical KMe3 binding handles. The sensor array uses multiple different recognition modes to distinguish between miniscule differences in target, such as identical lysine modifications at different sites of histone peptides. In addition, the sensor is affected by global changes in structure, so it is capable of discriminating between identical PTMs, at identical positions on amino acid fragments that vary only in peptide backbone length, and can be applied to detect non-methylation modifications such as acetylation and phosphorylations located multiple residues away from the targeted binding site. The synergistic application of multiple variables allows dual-mode deep cavitands to approach levels of recognition selectivity usually only seen with antibodies

THE CONTRIBUTION OF HIP STRENGTH TO HIP ADDUCTION DURING RUNNING IS INFLUENCED BY STEP RATE, ANKLE DORSIFLEXION AND INJURY STATUS

Peak hip adduction angle is frequently associated with running related injuries. The purpose of this study was to identify how clinical assessment measures interact to determine the presence of high or low peak hip adduction angles during running. A mixed sex sample of runners (n=125) comprising both injured and healthy controls were assessed for hip abduction strength and range of movement of the hip and ankle. Each runner then ran on a treadmill whilst 3D kinematic data was recorded, with peak hip adduction angles isolated from the data. All interest variables were analysed using a classification and regression tree procedure. This produced a model which was able to classify runners with either high or low peak hip adduction angles with an accuracy of 83.2%. The contribution of hip abductor strength to peak hip adduction angles was influenced by step rate, ankle dorsiflexion range of movement and injury status. This adds to our understanding of the relationship between hip strength and peak hip adduction

Using Electronic Drug Monitor Feedback to Improve Adherence to Antiretroviral Therapy Among HIV-Positive Patients in China

Effective antiretroviral therapy (ART) requires excellent adherence. Little is known about how to improve ART adherence in many HIV/AIDS-affected countries, including China. We therefore assessed an adherence intervention among HIV-positive patients in southwestern China. Eighty subjects were enrolled and monitored for 6 months. Sixty-eight remaining subjects were randomized to intervention/control arms. In months 7–12, intervention subjects were counseled using EDM feedback; controls continued with standard of care. Among randomized subjects, mean adherence and CD4 count were 86.8 vs. 83.8% and 297 vs. 357 cells/μl in intervention vs. control subjects, respectively. At month 12, among 64 subjects who completed the trial, mean adherence had risen significantly among intervention subjects to 96.5% but remained unchanged in controls. Mean CD4 count rose by 90 cells/μl and declined by 9 cells/μl among intervention and control subjects, respectively. EDM feedback as a counseling tool appears promising for management of HIV and other chronic diseases.Boston University and the Office of Health and Nutrition of the United States Agency for International Development (GHS-A-00-03-00030-00); World Health Organization; United States Centers for Disease Control; National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (K23 AI 62208); Mid-Career Mentoring Award (K24 RR020300

Effects of diabetes family history and exercise training on the expression of adiponectin and leptin and their receptors

The daughters of patients with diabetes have reduced insulin sensitivity index (ISI) scores compared with women with no family history of diabetes, but their ISI increase more in response to exercise training(1). The present study aimed to determine whether differences between these groups in exercise-induced changes in circulating adiponectin and leptin concentrations and expression of their genes and receptors in subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT), could explain differences in the exercise-induced changes in ISI between women with and without a family history of diabetes

Larval therapy for leg ulcers (VenUS II) : randomised controlled trial

Objective To compare the clinical effectiveness of larval therapy with a standard debridement technique (hydrogel) for sloughy or necrotic leg ulcers. Design Pragmatic, three armed randomised controlled trial. Setting Community nurse led services, hospital wards, and hospital outpatient leg ulcer clinics in urban and rural settings, United Kingdom. Participants 267 patients with at least one venous or mixed venous and arterial ulcer with at least 25% coverage of slough or necrotic tissue, and an ankle brachial pressure index of 0.6 or more. Interventions Loose larvae, bagged larvae, and hydrogel. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was time to healing of the largest eligible ulcer. Secondary outcomes were time to debridement, health related quality of life (SF-12), bacterial load, presence of meticillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus, adverse events, and ulcer related pain (visual analogue scale, from 0 mm for no pain to 150 mm for worst pain imaginable). Results Time to healing was not significantly different between the loose or bagged larvae group and the hydrogel group (hazard ratio for healing using larvae v hydrogel 1.13, 95% confidence interval 0.76 to 1.68; P=0.54). Larval therapy significantly reduced the time to debridement (2.31, 1.65 to 3.2; P<0.001). Health related quality of life and change in bacterial load over time were not significantly different between the groups. 6.7% of participants had MRSA at baseline. No difference was found between larval therapy and hydrogel in their ability to eradicate MRSA by the end of the debridement phase (75% (9/12) v 50% (3/6); P=0.34), although this comparison was underpowered. Mean ulcer related pain scores were higher in either larvae group compared with hydrogel (mean difference in pain score: loose larvae v hydrogel 46.74 (95% confidence interval 32.44 to 61.04), P<0.001; bagged larvae v hydrogel 38.58 (23.46 to 53.70), P<0.001). Conclusions Larval therapy did not improve the rate of healing of sloughy or necrotic leg ulcers or reduce bacterial load compared with hydrogel but did significantly reduce the time to debridement and increase ulcer pain. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN55114812 and National Research Register N0484123692