Meta-analysis of increased inhaled steroid or addition of salmeterol in asthma

doi:10.1136/bmj.321.7267.1016/a

BMJ 2000;321:1016 ( 21 October )

Letters

Meta-analysis of increased inhaled steroid or addition of salmeterol in asthma

Researchers can learn from industry based reporting standards

Greening et al's study should not have been included

Study should have been more thorough

Authors' reply

Researchers can learn from industry based reporting standards

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR $---$ The meta-analysis of inhaled salmeterol compared with inhaled steroids by Shrewsbury et al¹ is a fine counter exampleto recent controversial claims that the standard of industry sponsoredmeta-analyses in asthma is inferior to that of other meta-analyses.²Nevertheless, the paper raises one general difficulty with thereporting of meta-analyses.

In referring to the quality of individual studies the authors write: "In all studies, appropriate methods were used for summarisingand comparing treatments, and methods for handling missing datawere preplanned" (p 1368). If, as was almost certainly the case,the studies were carried out to the pharmaceutical industry'sstandards, the analyses will also have been preplanned as requiredby the guidelines of the International Conference on Harmonisation.³It does not follow, however, that this is necessarily the analysisthat found its way into print, or even the one that was used forthis meta-analysis.

The version published . . . [Full text of this article]

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us Add to Digg

Digg

StumbleUpon Add to Technorati

Technorati What's this?

Relevant Article

Meta-analysis of increased dose of inhaled steroid or addition of salmeterol in symptomatic asthma (MIASMA): Stephen Shrewsbury, Stephen Pyke, and Mark Britton
BMJ 2000 320: 1368-1373. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]