Review of Comparative Effectiveness of Treatments to Prevent Fractures

  1. Dennis M. Black, PhD;
  2. Steven Boonen, MD, PhD;
  3. Pierre Delmas, MD, PhD; and
  4. Kenneth W. Lyles, MD
  1. From the University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94107; University of Leuven, Leuven B-3000, Belgium; University of Lyon, INSERM Research Unit 831, Lyon 69437, France; and Duke University and Veterans' Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710.

    TO THE EDITOR:

    The meta-analysis by MacLean and colleagues (1) is interesting and comprehensive, but we question 1 methodological aspect: the use of previous meta-analyses and their combination with individual trials. The Methods section is unclear as to how previous meta-analyses were chosen or combined, and this may have led to inconsistent results. For example, for alendronate, 2 meta-analyses are listed for patients who are at high risk (defined in Table 1) for hip fracture (Table 4). One meta-analysis includes 2 trials in high-risk patients. The other includes 6 trials: 2 overlap with the first meta-analysis, whereas the other 4 do not meet the authors' high-risk criteria. …

    This 100-word excerpt has been provided in the absence of an abstract.

    | Table of Contents
    Most Read Most Read
    Most Commented Most Commented On
    Annals in the News Annals in the News
    Clinical Trials Clinical Trials
    Comparative Effectiveness Comparative Effectiveness
    Hospital Medicine Hospital Medicine
    • Advertisement
    • Advertisement