Draft synthesis: Cardiovascular outcomes with glucagon-like… — disposition

§3Disposition and amendments

§3.1Disposition table

Table 1. Every submission with its disposition. Each row links to the submission in full.

§3.2Summary by disposition

Table 2. Counts by disposition, with the meaning of each.

§3.3Resulting amendments

1. The conclusion is stated more strongly than the certainty rating supports — arising from DRAFT-INCRETIN-CAR/009. Conclusion wording is now drawn from a fixed set of formulations tied to the certainty rating, so that a low certainty rating produces a statement that the evidence may suggest an effect and that the estimate is likely to change with further research.
2. Studies using different outcome definitions are pooled into one estimate — arising from DRAFT-INCRETIN-CAR/003. Studies are now pooled only within an outcome definition, each definition is reported with its own estimate and certainty rating, and the summary of findings states which definition each row concerns.
3. A single-trial result is presented in the visual form of a pooled estimate — arising from DRAFT-INCRETIN-CAR/008. Outcomes contributed by a single trial are now reported without a pooled diamond, labelled as unreplicated, and downgraded for imprecision or inconsistency according to the framework rather than presented as a synthesis.
4. A funnel plot is presented for a set too small to interpret it — arising from DRAFT-INCRETIN-CAR/001. The funnel plot is removed for every outcome contributed by fewer than ten studies, and replaced by a statement that small-study effects could not be assessed at that number, together with the count of registered trials identified without posted results.
5. Point estimates are given without an interval — arising from DRAFT-INCRETIN-CAR/010. Every estimate now carries its interval where the source reported one, and where it did not, the estimate is annotated as reported without an interval rather than left to appear as a precise figure.
6. Intention-to-treat and efficacy-estimand results are combined without distinction — arising from DRAFT-INCRETIN-CAR/013. The treatment-policy estimand is used throughout as the primary analysis, the efficacy estimand is reported as a secondary analysis where available, and the estimand used is stated in every row of the summary of findings.
7. A surrogate outcome is used as the anchor without validation evidence — arising from DRAFT-INCRETIN-CAR/005. Where the anchor is a surrogate, the synthesis now states the evidence for the surrogate relationship, rates it separately, and downgrades the anchor rating for indirectness accordingly rather than carrying the surrogate as though it were the outcome of…
8. The choice of effect measure is not justified and changes the appearance of the result — arising from DRAFT-INCRETIN-CAR/012. Every outcome now reports the relative effect and, where an assumed baseline risk can be stated and sourced, the corresponding absolute effect, with the baseline risk and its source given in the same row.
9. Subgroup findings are reported that were not registered in the protocol — arising from DRAFT-INCRETIN-CAR/007. Every subgroup analysis is now labelled as pre-specified or post hoc against the registered protocol, post hoc analyses are reported in a separate subsection without a certainty rating, and the protocol version against which the labelling was made is stated.
10. Studies not published in English were excluded without assessment — arising from DRAFT-INCRETIN-CAR/004. Language restriction is removed from the protocol for the series, the records previously excluded on that ground are listed with their screening outcome, and the residual limitation is stated in the abstract of this review.
11. Efficacy outcomes are rated for certainty and harms are not — arising from DRAFT-INCRETIN-CAR/006. Every reported harm now carries a certainty rating on the same scale as the efficacy outcomes, with the downgrade reasons stated, and discontinuation for adverse events appears in the summary of findings rather than in an annex.

References cited on this page

References are numbered in order of first citation in this document. Each superscript in the text links to its entry below.

1. International Organization for Standardization. ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories. ISO/IEC Standard 2017;3rd edition. identifier not held by the Institute

Identifiers are reproduced only where the Institute holds them. Where a digital object identifier or PubMed identifier is not shown, the Institute has recorded the journal and year and has not constructed an identifier.