| Main Board • Cheap Jordan Shoes 50% OFF Sale Store|Cheapjordan |
| 17.01.2017, 11:58 - nieeshoes - Rank 6 - 1073 Posts
68.9 percent identified at least some drug-company funding. Only one-quarter of the RCT studies disclosed author funding sources, but among those that did, cheap retro jordans , 68.9 percent reported at least one author had financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry. Just two meta-analyses, however, cheap jordans for sale , addressed sources of financing for any of the RCTs. In one of these exceptions, cheap jordans , the financial information was included — but only in a footnote to a table. In the other meta-analysis, cheap jordan shoes , the information was included at the back of the paper in a “characteristics of studies” table that followed the primary text and references. These do not offer suitable defenses against charges the meta-analyses buried potential conflicts of interests, the JAMA paper’s authors contend, because neither footnotes nor some back-of-the-paper table on study features “are typically reviewed by the average reader.” Moreover, cheap air jordans , none of the meta-analyses — including these two — relayed any information on ties between industry and authors of the original RCT. Failure to report industry links to pharmaceutical trials “may lead readers to trust the conclusions of a meta-analysis when they potentially should not, cheap jordans online ,” authors of the new JAMA paper argue. At a minimum, they explain, cheap jordans free shipping , such omissions leave out clues to influence by one or more parties with a vested financial interest in an RCT’s outcome. There are, of course, cheap wholesale jordans , plenty of other problems associated with meta-analyses, not the least being that few compare well-matched populations. Some may compare huge studies in men with those conducted http://www.bcc.aaf.pl/...hread.php?thread_id=15561 http://www.wrc2league....iewthread.php?thread_id=0 http://www.rascals-gam...orum_topic&topic=5919 |