scholarly journals Physical activity interventions for major chronic disease: a matched-pair analysis of Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Hacke ◽  
David Nunan
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Matched Pair ◽  
List Type ◽  
Matched Pairs ◽  
Matched Pair Analysis ◽  
Physical Activity Interventions ◽  
Cochrane Reviews ◽  
Major Chronic Disease ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Pair Analysis

AbstractObjectiveTo assess the degree of concordance between Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews with meta-analyses of physical activity interventions.Study Design and SettingWe conducted a matched-pair analysis with individual meta-analyses as the unit of analysis, comparing Cochrane reviews of randomised controlled trials of physical activity interventions with non-Cochrane reviews. Meta-analyses were matched based on the intervention, condition, outcome and publication year. Matched pairs were contrasted statistically in terms of differences between effect estimates, their precision, and number of citations using Wilcoxon two-sample test and agreement using Bland-Altman plots.ResultsOur search yielded 24 matched meta-analyses. Matched pairs were similar in terms of the number of included studies, sample sizes and publication year but only half (51.7%) of 545 individual clinical trials were included in both the Cochrane and non-Cochrane paired reviews. Effect estimates from non-Cochrane reviews were larger for 15 (62.5%) pairs, smaller for 8 (33.3%) and equal to Cochrane reviews for one (4.2%) pair. On average, effect estimates from non-Cochrane reviews were 0.12 log units (or 13%) higher compared with matched Cochrane reviews (z-score −2.312, P=0.012). We observed discrepancies with regard to the statistical (n=6) and clinical interpretation (n=4) of effect estimates, with non-Cochrane reviews reporting more often a statistically significant result (4/6) and effect sizes favouring intervention of greater than a two-fold (4/4) compared with Cochrane matches. Non-Cochrane reviews were also more frequently cited irrespective of whether the results agree or disagree in their statistical conclusion but this finding did not reach statistical significance at the traditional 0.05 threshold.ConclusionOn average, meta-analyses from non-Cochrane reviews reported higher effect estimates and were more likely to show significant effects favouring the intervention compared with meta-analyses from Cochrane reviews. Though differences were small, they were sufficient to result in important discrepancies in statistical and clinical interpretations between a number of reviews.What is new?Key findings:Findings demonstrate non-Cochrane reviews on average report larger effect estimates and have discrepancies in statistical and clinical interpretation more likely to favour physical activity interventions. Potential sources underpinning discrepant review findings are explored in an accompanying sister paper.What this adds to what was known?The first assessment of systematic differences between paired Cochrane and non-Cochrane meta-analyses examining the role of physical activity interventions for preventing and treating major chronic diseaseWhat is the implication and what should change now?Authors should be aware of the need of protocol registration to minimise unnecessary duplication and be mindful of potential discrepant findings depending on the source of review evidence.

scholarly journals Systematic Differences between Cochrane and Non-Cochrane Meta-Analyses on the Same Topic: A Matched Pair Analysis

PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. e0144980 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johanna Useem ◽  
Alana Brennan ◽  
Michael LaValley ◽  
Michelle Vickery ◽  
Omid Ameli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Matched Pair ◽  
Matched Pair Analysis ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Pair Analysis

Influence of Images in Online Reviews for Search Goods on Helpfulness

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-73
Author(s):  
Lars Osterbrink ◽  
Paul Alpar ◽  
Alexander Seher
Keyword(s):  
Consumer Choice ◽  
Online Reviews ◽  
Potential Interaction ◽  
Matched Pair ◽  
Social Commerce ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Matched Pair Analysis ◽  
The Right ◽  
Pair Analysis ◽  
Positive Effect

AbstractReviewing and rating are important features of many social media websites, but they are found on many e-commerce sites too. The combination of social interaction and e-commerce is sometimes referred to as social commerce to indicate that people are supporting each other in the process of buying goods and services. Rgeviews of other consumers have a significant effect on consumer choice because they are usually considered authentic and more trustworthy than information presented by a vendor. The collaborative effort of consumers helps to make the right purchase decision (or prevent from a wrong one). The effect of reviews has often been researched in terms of helpfulness as indicated by their readers. Images are an important factor of helpfulness in reviews of experience goods where personal tastes and use play an important role. We extend this research to search goods where objective characteristics seem to prevail. In addition, we analyze potential interaction with other variables. The empirical study is performed with regression analyses on 3,483 search good reviews from Amazon.com followed by a matched pair analysis of 186 review pairs. We find that images have a significant positive effect on helpfulness of reviews of search goods too. This is especially true in case of short and ambiguous reviews.

410 ILEAL-CONDUIT – VS COLONIC-CONDUIT – A MATCHED-PAIR ANALYSIS

2010 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 150
Author(s):  
R. Stein ◽  
A. Schröder ◽  
T. Hagen ◽  
J.W. Thüroff
Keyword(s):  
Ileal Conduit ◽  
Matched Pair ◽  
Matched Pair Analysis ◽  
Colonic Conduit ◽  
Pair Analysis

Long-term evaluation of oncologic and functional outcomes after laparoscopic open-assisted radical cystectomy: a matched-pair analysis

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 1455-1461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simone Albisinni ◽  
Ksenija Limani ◽  
Lisa Ingels ◽  
Felix Kwizera ◽  
Renaud Bollens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radical Cystectomy ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Matched Pair ◽  
Matched Pair Analysis ◽  
Term Evaluation ◽  
Pair Analysis

scholarly journals Holmium laser versus thulium laser enucleation of the prostate: a matched-pair analysis from two centers

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. 223-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giacomo Maria Pirola ◽  
Giovanni Saredi ◽  
Ricardo Codas Duarte ◽  
Lorraine Bernard ◽  
Andrea Pacchetti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Group Versus ◽  
Holmium Laser ◽  
Matched Pair ◽  
Urinary Flow ◽  
Thulium Laser ◽  
Homogeneous Groups ◽  
Matched Pair Analysis ◽  
Laser Enucleation ◽  
Pair Analysis

Background: The aim of our study was to compare perioperative and functional outcomes of two different prostatic laser enucleation techniques performed in two high-volume centers: 100 W holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) (Lyon, France) and 110 W thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) (Varese, Italy). Materials and Methods: A nonrandomized, observational, retrospective and matched-pair analysis was performed on two homogeneous groups of 117 patients that underwent prostate laser enucleation in the HoLEP or ThuLEP centers between January 2015 and April 2017, following the classical ‘three lobes’ enucleation technique. The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score and prostate volume were the main parameters considered for matching the patients between the two groups. Patients on anticoagulant therapy, with documented detrusor hypoactivity or hyperactivity or with the finding of concurrent prostate cancer were excluded from the study. Follow up was assessed at 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. Results: Median enucleation and morcellation time was 75.5 and 11.5 min, respectively, in the HoLEP group versus 70.5 and 12 min, respectively, in the ThuLEP group ( p = 0.001 and 0.49, respectively). Enucleated adenoma weight was comparable (44 g versus 45.6 g, p = 0.60). Energy index (3884.63 versus 4137.35 J/g, p = 0.30) and enucleation index (0.57 versus 0.6 g/min, p = 0.81) were similar in the two groups. Catheterization time was comparable (1 versus 1 day; p = 0.14). The International Prostate Symptom Score and Quality of Life score significantly decreased, as well as maximal urinary flow rate. Median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) drop 1 year after surgery was 2.1 ng/ml in the HoLEP group (−52.83%) versus 1.75 ng/ml in the ThuLEP group (−47.85%) ( p = 0.013). Conclusion: Both HoLEP (100 W) and ThuLEP (110 W) relieve lower urinary tract symptoms in a comparable way with high efficacy and safety, with negligible clinical differences.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document