Excluded studies with rationale

Jane Burch; Stephen Rice; Huiqin Yang; Aileen Neilson; Lisa Stirk; Roger Francis; Paul Holloway; Peter Selby; Dawn Craig

Warning: The NCBI web site requires JavaScript to function. more...

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Burch J, Rice S, Yang H, et al. Systematic review of the use of bone turnover markers for monitoring the response to osteoporosis treatment: the secondary prevention of fractures, and primary prevention of fractures in high-risk groups. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2014 Feb. (Health Technology Assessment, No. 18.11.)

$Cover of Systematic review of the use of bone turnover markers for monitoring the response to osteoporosis treatment: the secondary prevention of fractures, and primary prevention of fractures in high-risk groups$

Systematic review of the use of bone turnover markers for monitoring the response to osteoporosis treatment: the secondary prevention of fractures, and primary prevention of fractures in high-risk groups.

Show details

Contents

< Prev Next >

Appendix 3Excluded studies with rationale

Systematic review of the clinical effectiveness evidence

Identified for full-paper screening 444; nine were unobtainable,¹⁹⁶^–²⁰⁴ (one²⁰⁰ was identified from a bibliography with the same journal details as a screened paper,²⁰⁵ but a different title), 35 were reviews that underwent bibliographic screening,⁵^,⁶^,¹¹^,¹⁵^,³⁴^,⁴⁷^,⁵⁰^,⁶⁹^–⁹⁶ and 42 were included. Of the remaining 358 studies, the reasons for exclusion are given below (some papers were excluded for more than one reason):

1. protocol linked to excluded trial: 4 (#206 linked to #207; #208 linked to #209; #210 linked to #211; #212 linked to #213 and #214)
2. abstract linked to an included study: 21¹⁰⁷^–¹¹¹^,¹¹³^–¹²²^,¹²⁴^–¹²⁹
3. abstracts linked to an excluded study: 6²¹⁵^–²²⁰
4. abstract with insufficient data to extract (authors contacted and either confirmed no further data available or did not reply): 6²²¹^–²²⁶
5. duplicate full paper of an included study: 5 (#58 linked to #110; 74 linked to #478; 195 linked to #125; #130 linked to#106; #123 linked to #137)
6. no data for osteoporotic and/or treated patients separately from a more heterogeneous population: 16³^,¹⁰⁵^,¹³⁴^,²²⁷^–²³⁹
7. manufacturer’s trial for which results are currently not available from the manufacturer’s database: 1²⁴⁰
8. no osteoporotic patients: 83³⁷^,¹⁸¹^,²⁰²^,²⁰⁵^,²⁴¹^–³¹⁹
9. patients who were not receiving an osteoporosis medication: 118³⁷^,⁹⁸^,¹⁰¹^,²⁰²^,²⁰⁵^,²²⁰^,²⁴⁵^,²⁴⁷^,²⁴⁸^,²⁵²^–²⁶¹^,²⁶³^,²⁶⁷^,²⁷²^–²⁷⁴^,²⁷⁷^,²⁷⁹^,²⁸¹^–²⁸⁶^,²⁸⁸^,²⁹⁰^–³⁰⁷^,³⁰⁹^–³¹²^,³¹⁴^–³¹⁷^,³¹⁹^–³⁷⁷
10. patients receiving an osteoporosis treatment but not one of the ones being evaluated in the review: 17¹⁰^,²⁵¹^,²⁶⁶^,²⁸⁹^,³⁷⁸^–³⁹⁰
11. a bone turnover marker of interest not included in the tests used in the study: 43²⁵²^,²⁵⁹^,²⁶²^,²⁸³^,²⁹⁵^,³²¹^,³²²^,³²⁵^,³²⁹^,³³⁵^,³⁴⁵^,³⁴⁷^,³⁴⁸^,³⁵³^–³⁵⁵^,³⁵⁸^,³⁶³^,³⁶⁵^,³⁶⁸^,³⁸⁴^,³⁸⁸^,³⁹¹^–⁴¹¹
12. not prospective: 1⁴⁰¹
13. non-RCTs that had fewer than 20 patients reaching the analysis stage of the study: 19⁴⁵^,⁴¹²^–⁴²⁹
14. no outcomes of interest reported or sufficient data to calculate any: 85³¹^,⁴⁶^,⁵¹^,⁵²^,⁵⁹^,¹⁰⁰^,¹⁰²^,¹⁰³^,¹⁰⁵^,¹²⁴^,¹³⁸^,²¹⁴^,²²¹^,²²⁵^,²²⁷^,²²⁸^,²³¹^,²⁴⁰^,⁴³⁰^–⁴⁹⁶

Systematic review of the cost-effectiveness evidence

Examined health benefits only.¹⁶⁷
Review article mentioned cost-effectiveness in the abstract, but reported only the characteristics and clinical effectiveness of bone turnover markers in the results; bibliography was scanned for relevant cost-effectiveness studies but none was cited.⁴⁹⁷

Copyright © Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO 2014. This work was produced by Burch et al. under the terms of a commissioning contract issued by the Secretary of State for Health. This issue may be freely reproduced for the purposes of private research and study and extracts (or indeed, the full report) may be included in professional journals provided that suitable acknowledgement is made and the reproduction is not associated with any form of advertising. Applications for commercial reproduction should be addressed to: NIHR Journals Library, National Institute for Health Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, Alpha House, University of Southampton Science Park, Southampton SO16 7NS, UK.

Included under terms of UK Non-commercial Government License.

Bookshelf ID: NBK261656

Contents

< Prev Next >

PubReader
Print View
Cite this Page
Burch J, Rice S, Yang H, et al. Systematic review of the use of bone turnover markers for monitoring the response to osteoporosis treatment: the secondary prevention of fractures, and primary prevention of fractures in high-risk groups. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2014 Feb. (Health Technology Assessment, No. 18.11.) Appendix 3, Excluded studies with rationale.
PDF version of this title (1.6M)

Excluded studies with rationale - Systematic review of the use of bone turnover ...
Excluded studies with rationale - Systematic review of the use of bone turnover markers for monitoring the response to osteoporosis treatment: the secondary prevention of fractures, and primary prevention of fractures in high-risk groups

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Bookshelf

Systematic review of the use of bone turnover markers for monitoring the response to osteoporosis treatment: the secondary prevention of fractures, and primary prevention of fractures in high-risk groups.

Appendix 3Excluded studies with rationale

Systematic review of the clinical effectiveness evidence

Systematic review of the cost-effectiveness evidence

Views

In this Page

Other titles in this collection

Recent Activity