Abstract
[Extract]
Lancet readers scanning the letters by James Smith and colleagues and by Arnold Monto could be forgiven for thinking that a band of biased and nihilistic Cochranites had concocted a paper arbitrarily suppressing most of the available evidence on the effects of
neuraminidase inhibitors for influenza.
As with all systematic reviews, our study had predetermined inclusion criteria that led us to focus on randomised controlled trials (the most reliable source of evidence of effectiveness) assessing the effects of registered antivirals on naturally occurring influenza in otherwise healthy adults
Lancet readers scanning the letters by James Smith and colleagues and by Arnold Monto could be forgiven for thinking that a band of biased and nihilistic Cochranites had concocted a paper arbitrarily suppressing most of the available evidence on the effects of
neuraminidase inhibitors for influenza.
As with all systematic reviews, our study had predetermined inclusion criteria that led us to focus on randomised controlled trials (the most reliable source of evidence of effectiveness) assessing the effects of registered antivirals on naturally occurring influenza in otherwise healthy adults
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1573 |
| Number of pages | 1 |
| Journal | Lancet |
| Volume | 367 |
| Issue number | 9522 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 13 May 2006 |
| Externally published | Yes |