Reason for withdrawal from publication
The review was withdrawn from The Cochrane Library issue 1, 2011 as the authors were unable to update it.
The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.
Feedback
Antibiotics for exacerbations of chronic obstructi
Summary
Feedback: While authors concluded that: "... in COPD exacerbations ... antibiotics ... reduce the risk of short‐term mortality by 77%, decrease the risk of treatment failure by 53% and the risk of sputum purulence by 44%; with a small increase in the risk of diarrhoea. These results should be interpreted with caution ... Nevertheless, this review supports antibiotics for patients with COPD exacerbations ...
The plain language statement bring the other message IN BOLD: "Despite their widespread use, the value of antibiotics in exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains controversial"
I believe that this is quite clear misinforormation of consumers.
Submitter agrees with default conflict of interest statement: I certify that I have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with a financial interest in the subject matter of my feedback.
Reply
We thank Dr Vasilly Vlassov for his interest in our review. Dr Vasilly Vlassov may find the introductory sentence contradictory in the plain language summary. This is becasue this opening sentence is part of the thinking of the backgrond to the topic whereas the "added" comment in our results is part of the conclusions that are modulated by the "methodological nature" and the evidence provided from the 11 trials included in the review.
Felix Ram
Contributors
Vasiliy Vlassov
Correction needed, 25 May 2006
Summary
Excellent review on an important topic. However, the reviewers reversed the antibiotic/placebo groups on an important article when doing their anlayses. The numbers for Anthonisen 1987 should be ‐ placebo: 28/59, antibiotic: 19/57. This affects figure 03 and analysis 01.02.
Reply
Dear Dr Craig Roberts, Thank you for your interest in our review and for informing us of the data entry error (transposition) in one of the included studies (Anthonisen et al) for treatment failure outcome. We have re‐analysed the data with this revision. The revised outcome does not affect the conclusion (or key findings) of the review as the Anthonisen et al and Jorgensen et al studies were removed from the final analysis (sub‐group analysis) as they were conducted in the community and therefore introduced heterogeneity in this outcome. Although, the revised data did reduced the level of heterogeneity (as measured by I2 statistic from 80% to 67%) it remained significant. We believe that the revised data has little (to no) impact on the overall findings of the review and therefore we will incorporate this revision in the next update of the review. Again, thank you for your interest in our review and for highlighting this data entry error. Kind regards Dr Felix Ram
Contributors
Craig Roberts
What's new
| Date | Event | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 25 November 2010 | Amended | Review withdrawn issue 1, 2011 |
History
Protocol first published: Issue 4, 2003 Review first published: Issue 2, 2006
| Date | Event | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 12 September 2008 | Amended | Converted to new review format. |
| 25 July 2006 | Amended | Data entry error for treatment failure outcome corrected for one study. Review conclusions unaffected. |
| 5 June 2006 | Feedback has been incorporated | Feedback comment and reply added to review. |
| 25 May 2006 | Feedback has been incorporated | Correction needed |
Sources of support
Internal sources
No sources of support supplied
External sources
RRR is supported by Red Respira‐ISCIII‐RTIC‐03/11 and la Generalitat de Catalunya (2001/SGR00386), Spain.
JGA was supported by Red RESPIRA (RTIC C03/11), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spain.
ANG was partially supported by RCESP (ISCIII, C03/09), Spain.
Withdrawn from publication for reasons stated in the review