Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Contrary to authors' comments, meta-analysis supports global helminth control initiatives
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITOR
Dickson et al's meta-analysis of the effects of treatment for
intestinal helminth infection on growth and cognitive performance in
children has produced two important findings, only one of which has
been discussed by the authors.1
The meta-analysis has helped highlight the poor quality of many of the trials carried out so far. The more important result (not remarked on) is the extraordinary finding that, despite the many systematic differences observed between the studies used in the meta-analysis, treatment unfailingly has a positive average effect on both the outcomes studied (table 3). In addition, the fact that many systematic differences were observed between the studies in the meta-analysis seriously questions the value of trying to derive global summary results for any of the comparisons on both statistical and biological grounds.
The result of the meta-analysis supports an important principle for
judging causality from the results of clinical trials
that