JISCMail - EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH Archives

The Cochrane Review did not miss "nearly half of the eligible trials". A small number of studies were missed due to the primary focus on peer-reviewed reports in scientific journals, but addition of these data makes little or no difference to the results of the review for the main outcome;
The trials comparators were unambiguously, transparently, and accurately described;
The selection of outcomes for benefits was appropriate and was consistent with World Health Organization guidance;
The review included published and unpublished data on serious harms, and the findings on mortality were reported transparently and responsibly;
The review was compliant with Cochrane’s current conflict of interest policy;
Cochrane’s media coverage was cautious and balanced, but we recognize that there could be improvements in relation to transparency where external experts are quoted;
The BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine article substantially overstated its criticisms.

I haven’t had a chance to read the rebuttal in full detail so won’t comment but wanted to share so others can have a read as well.

Cheers,

Ahmed