Commentary on Cochrane review of neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults and children

M. Jones, T. Jefferson, P. Doshi, C. Del Mar, C. Heneghan, I. Onakpoya

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleResearchpeer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In recent years there has been much debate and controversy surrounding the efficacy and safety of neuraminidase inhibitors for influenza, in part because the data underlying certain efficacy claims were not available for independent scrutiny. In 2014, a Cochrane review was published, based exclusively on an almost complete set of clinical study reports and other regulatory documents. Clinical study reports can run to thousands of pages, providing an extensive amount of information on the planning, conduct and results of each trial. After a protracted campaign to obtain the reports, the manufacturers of the medications provided them unconditionally. The review authors subsequently published the underlying documents simultaneously with the Cochrane review, endorsing the concept of open science. In the following commentary, the background to and results of this review are summarized and put into clinical context.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)217-221
Number of pages5
JournalClinical Microbiology and Infection
Volume21
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015

Fingerprint

Neuraminidase
Human Influenza
Safety
Clinical Studies

Cite this

@article{7d7b738ae35248c495bf2c37fbfb790b,
title = "Commentary on Cochrane review of neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults and children",
abstract = "In recent years there has been much debate and controversy surrounding the efficacy and safety of neuraminidase inhibitors for influenza, in part because the data underlying certain efficacy claims were not available for independent scrutiny. In 2014, a Cochrane review was published, based exclusively on an almost complete set of clinical study reports and other regulatory documents. Clinical study reports can run to thousands of pages, providing an extensive amount of information on the planning, conduct and results of each trial. After a protracted campaign to obtain the reports, the manufacturers of the medications provided them unconditionally. The review authors subsequently published the underlying documents simultaneously with the Cochrane review, endorsing the concept of open science. In the following commentary, the background to and results of this review are summarized and put into clinical context.",
author = "M. Jones and T. Jefferson and P. Doshi and {Del Mar}, C. and C. Heneghan and I. Onakpoya",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1016/j.cmi.2014.10.011",
language = "English",
volume = "21",
pages = "217--221",
journal = "Clinical Microbiology and Infection",
issn = "1198-743X",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "3",

}

Commentary on Cochrane review of neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults and children. / Jones, M.; Jefferson, T.; Doshi, P.; Del Mar, C.; Heneghan, C.; Onakpoya, I.

In: Clinical Microbiology and Infection, Vol. 21, No. 3, 2015, p. 217-221.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Commentary on Cochrane review of neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults and children

AU - Jones, M.

AU - Jefferson, T.

AU - Doshi, P.

AU - Del Mar, C.

AU - Heneghan, C.

AU - Onakpoya, I.

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - In recent years there has been much debate and controversy surrounding the efficacy and safety of neuraminidase inhibitors for influenza, in part because the data underlying certain efficacy claims were not available for independent scrutiny. In 2014, a Cochrane review was published, based exclusively on an almost complete set of clinical study reports and other regulatory documents. Clinical study reports can run to thousands of pages, providing an extensive amount of information on the planning, conduct and results of each trial. After a protracted campaign to obtain the reports, the manufacturers of the medications provided them unconditionally. The review authors subsequently published the underlying documents simultaneously with the Cochrane review, endorsing the concept of open science. In the following commentary, the background to and results of this review are summarized and put into clinical context.

AB - In recent years there has been much debate and controversy surrounding the efficacy and safety of neuraminidase inhibitors for influenza, in part because the data underlying certain efficacy claims were not available for independent scrutiny. In 2014, a Cochrane review was published, based exclusively on an almost complete set of clinical study reports and other regulatory documents. Clinical study reports can run to thousands of pages, providing an extensive amount of information on the planning, conduct and results of each trial. After a protracted campaign to obtain the reports, the manufacturers of the medications provided them unconditionally. The review authors subsequently published the underlying documents simultaneously with the Cochrane review, endorsing the concept of open science. In the following commentary, the background to and results of this review are summarized and put into clinical context.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84933529300&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.cmi.2014.10.011

DO - 10.1016/j.cmi.2014.10.011

M3 - Review article

VL - 21

SP - 217

EP - 221

JO - Clinical Microbiology and Infection

JF - Clinical Microbiology and Infection

SN - 1198-743X

IS - 3

ER -