Response to comment from Brasky et al.
نویسندگان
چکیده
We thank Brasky et al. for their review (Brasky et al., 2016) of our meta-analysis on the association between NSAID use and risk of endometrial cancer (Verdoodt et al., 2016). We welcome the additional information on two of their studies, and the discussion points they have raised, which are valuable contributions to the topics discussed in our meta-analysis. Below we respond to the issues raised by Brasky et al. Regarding the choice of point estimate for the VITAL cohort study (Brasky et al., 2013), we have included a conservative estimate in our analysis of regular aspirin use, leading to a pooled relative risk of 0.92 (95% CI = 0.84–1.00) for all cohort studies combined. Brasky et al. suggest using a different estimate, which would yield a pooled relative risk of 0.91 (95% CI = 0.83–0.99) (Brasky et al., 2016). Notwithstanding the principal choice of estimate, we do not believe that the small difference between the two pooled estimates for cohort studies justifies changing or adapting the conclusions in our meta-analysis, which were based on risk estimates for both cohort and case-control studies, and on a number of sensitivity and stratified analyses. Moreover, we do not support the argument of Brasky et al. regarding the importance of statistical significance as this alone can not be used for proving a specific hypothesis or measuring the importance of the result (Wasserstein and Lazar, 2016). Decisions on the inor exclusion of studies were based on pre-defined, objective criteria, as recommended by the Cochrane collaboration for systematic reviews of interventions (Higgins and Green, 2011). We avoided exclusion of studies based on subjective judgement of study quality, but instead have provided a narrative discussion on the influence of the heterogeneous character and potential biases of included studies. Finally, with regard to low-dose versus high-dose aspirin, we would like to emphasise that the optimumdose and duration of aspirin use for cancer prevention is still debated, and several studies have indicated that low-dose aspirin (~75–150 mg) is as efficient as higher-dose
منابع مشابه
Addressing NCDs: Penetration of the Producers of Hazardous Products into Global Health Environment Requires a Strong Response; Comment on “Addressing NCDs: Challenges From Industry Market Promotion and Interferences”
Timely warnings and examples of industry interference in relation to tobacco, alcohol, food and breast milk substitutes are given in the editorial by Tangcharoensathien et al. Such interference is rife at national levels and also at the global level. In an era of ‘private public partnerships’ the alcohol and food industries have succeeded in insinuating themselves into the global health environ...
متن کاملHow Can a Global Social Support System Hope to Achieve Fairer Competiveness?; Comment on “A Global Social Support System: What the International Community Could Learn From the United States’ National Basketball Association”
Ooms et al sets out some good general principles for a global social support system to improve fairer global competitiveness as a result of redistribution. This commentary sets out to summarize some of the conditions that would need to be satisfied for it to level up gradients in inequality through such a social support system, using the National Basketball Association (NBA) example as a point ...
متن کاملThe Co-Constitution of Health Systems and Innovation; Comment on “What Health System Challenges Should Responsible Innovation in Health Address? Insights From an International Scoping Review”
Lehoux et al provide a timely and relevant turn on the broad and ongoing discussion around the introduction of health technology and innovation. More specifically, the authors suggest a demand-driven approach to health innovation that starts from identifying challenges and demands at the health system level. In this commentary, I review a number of underlying implications of their study in rela...
متن کاملThe Pill vs. the Sword: Additional Considerations; Comment on “The Pill Is Mightier Than the Sword”
In this paper, I present additional information for policy-makers and researchers to consider in response to the view proposed by Potts et al that “the pill is mightier than the sword.” I identify states with both high rates of terrorism and a youth bulge and discuss correlates of both these societal characteristics. The research examined supports the view that factors other than access to fami...
متن کاملSome Notes on Critical Appraisal of Prevalence Studies; Comment on: “The Development of a Critical Appraisal Tool for Use in Systematic Reviews Addressing Questions of Prevalence”
Decisions in healthcare should be based on information obtained according to the principles of Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM). An increasing number of systematic reviews are published which summarize the results of prevalence studies. Interpretation of the results of these reviews should be accompanied by an appraisal of the methodological quality of the included data and studies. The critical a...
متن کامل