Consultation record
Submissions accepted — page 7
The submission is accepted and the draft is amended as proposed. The amendment is recorded in the amendment log of the document it changed and is traceable to the numbered submission.
Submissions
735 documents · page 7 of 25
Table 1. Submissions with this disposition, on this page.
| Reference | Consultation | Respondent | Point raised |
|---|---|---|---|
| DRAFT-ADOLESCENT-S/005 | Draft synthesis: incretin receptor agonists in adolescents | Dr Evander Ashworth-Danquah | The same concept is given three different names in one document |
| DRAFT-ADOLESCENT-S/006 | Draft synthesis: incretin receptor agonists in adolescents | Eamon Sandringham-Adu | The search strategy as published cannot be re-run |
| DRAFT-ADOLESCENT-S/007 | Draft synthesis: incretin receptor agonists in adolescents | Dr Delphine Trelawney | The comparator was given at a dose below the one in general use |
| DRAFT-ADOLESCENT-S/008 | Draft synthesis: incretin receptor agonists in adolescents | Dr Ivo Quintanilha | Attrition is assessed in the risk-of-bias domains and not reported as a number |
| DRAFT-ADOLESCENT-S/010 | Draft synthesis: incretin receptor agonists in adolescents | Stellan Cholmondeley-Ade | The review does not say when it will be updated or what would trigger an update |
| DRAFT-ADOLESCENT-S/013 | Draft synthesis: incretin receptor agonists in adolescents | Dr Jozef Brandvold-Achterberg | Risk-of-bias judgements are reported as an overall rating without the domains |
| DRAFT-ADOLESCENT-S/015 | Draft synthesis: incretin receptor agonists in adolescents | Dr Matthias Wintringham industry | Two factual descriptions of the sponsor's programme are inaccurate |
| DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/002 | Draft analytical review: surveys of unregulated peptide supply | Dr Quentin Zimmerthal | The draft moves between purity and content as though they were one quantity |
| DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/003 | Draft analytical review: surveys of unregulated peptide supply | Dr Melisande Thorsby-Nakamura | Independent results are not paired with the certificate figure for the same lot |
| DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/004 | Draft analytical review: surveys of unregulated peptide supply | Dr Eamon Immelmann | Quantitative claims are reproduced without the method that produced them |
| DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/006 | Draft analytical review: surveys of unregulated peptide supply | Dr Jolanta Uttridge | Contributing results are reported in units that were not converted before pooling |
| DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/010 | Draft analytical review: surveys of unregulated peptide supply | Dr Sigrún Vercingetorix | Results below the limit of quantitation are treated as zero |
| DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/011 | Draft analytical review: surveys of unregulated peptide supply | Dr Kamila Glendinning-Uche | Content results are reported without the standard they were assigned against |
| DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/014 | Draft analytical review: surveys of unregulated peptide supply | Dr Yusuf Whitmarsh-Obi | One laboratory contributes most of the results in the pooled set |
| DRAFT-REGISTRY-STR/002 | Draft structure of the document registry | Anselm Mountstephen | The registry is published only as pages and not in a form that can be processed |
| DRAFT-REGISTRY-STR/004 | Draft structure of the document registry | Dr Adaeze Underhill-Okafor | Four dates are given and their relation is not explained |
| DRAFT-REGISTRY-STR/005 | Draft structure of the document registry | Dr Rosalind Petrossian | A printed copy loses the document identifier |
| DRAFT-REGISTRY-STR/006 | Draft structure of the document registry | Stellan Cholmondeley-Ade | The same quantity is presented differently in two series |
| DRAFT-REGISTRY-STR/007 | Draft structure of the document registry | Eamon Sandringham-Adu | The front-matter summary describes the finding without stating it |
| DRAFT-REGISTRY-STR/009 | Draft structure of the document registry | Dr Ivo Quintanilha | A document does not show what draws on it |
| DRAFT-TOOLS-DISCLA/001 | Draft terms for the Institute’s calculators | Professor Bartolomeu Nkosi-Lindegaard | Independence is asserted and the mechanism securing it is not described |
| DRAFT-TOOLS-DISCLA/002 | Draft terms for the Institute’s calculators | Dr Georgiana Mountstephen | What the site collects about a reader is not stated in terms a reader can check |
| DRAFT-TOOLS-DISCLA/003 | Draft terms for the Institute’s calculators | Eamon Sandringham-Adu | The search date is not on the face of the document |
| DRAFT-TOOLS-DISCLA/004 | Draft terms for the Institute’s calculators | Dr Vasilisa Sandringham-Adu | A party that is assessed and also sponsors should be disclosed on its own assessment |
| DRAFT-TOOLS-DISCLA/005 | Draft terms for the Institute’s calculators | Ivo Mountstephen | The terms on which the documents may be reused are not stated |
| DRAFT-TOOLS-DISCLA/008 | Draft terms for the Institute’s calculators | Dr Quentin Enthoven | No term limit applies to membership of the assessment committee |
| DRAFT-TOOLS-DISCLA/009 | Draft terms for the Institute’s calculators | Anselm Mountstephen | A reader who acted on a document is not told when it is corrected |
| DRAFT-TOOLS-DISCLA/013 | Draft terms for the Institute’s calculators | Dr Evander Ashworth-Danquah | The same concept is given three different names in one document |
| DRAFT-TOOLS-DISCLA/015 | Draft terms for the Institute’s calculators | Dr Quentin Gwynne-Sarpong | Whether external reviewers are paid is not stated |
| DRAFT-TOOLS-DISCLA/016 | Draft terms for the Institute’s calculators | Dr Vasilisa Immelmann | There is no route to challenge a disposition |
page 7 of 25