Reason for withdrawal from publication
This review was withdrawn from The Cochrane Library in issue 2, 2009 as the remaining review author was not able to undertake the update due to other work commitments.
The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.
Feedback
Nasal decongestants for the common cold
Summary
Two issues identified in the course of preparing an abstract for the journal Evidence‐based Health Care.
1. Minor disagreement concerning scope of review. Most readers will probably be interested in what relieves congestion, irrespective of whether it is single or multiple agent. This would suggest that considering both single and multiple agent preparations in the review would be useful, although clearly it would be important to clearly indicate which was which.
2. Major disagreement on your interpretation of the results of the single trial on multiple dose. You've interpreted this as suggesting multiple dosing is ineffective. In fact we have no evidence one way or the other. The confidence intervals are compatible with both important improvements (similar in size to that highlighted for single dose use) and important disbenefit ie WMD ‐0.07 95%CI ‐0.21 to +0.07.
Hope these comments are useful.
Best wishes. Chris Hyde.
I certify that I have no affiliations with or involvement in any organisation or entity with a direct financial interest in the subject matter of my criticisms.
Reply
A1. We do not review multiple agents as this would be a duplication of part of the review covered by: De Sutter AIM, Lemiengre M, Campbell H, Mackinnon HF. Antihistamines for the common cold (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2003. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. CD001267
A2. We have amended the discussion to resolve this issue.
I certify that I have no affiliations with or involvement in any organisation or entity with a direct financial interest in the subject matter of my criticisms.
G. Jenny Latte
Contributors
Chris Hyde Reply to feedback added 06/01/04
What's new
| Date | Event | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1 February 2009 | Amended | Withdrawn from The Cochrane Library, issue 2, 2009 |
History
Protocol first published: Issue 1, 1999 Review first published: Issue 1, 2000
| Date | Event | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 14 May 2008 | Amended | Converted to new review format. |
| 9 November 2006 | New search has been performed | Searches conducted. Jenny Latte repeated the original searches. Twelve new studies were identified. A thirteenth study was sent to the review authors by a reader of the review. The review authors are awaiting publication of the fourteenth study. The review now has data for safety analysis. |
| 31 January 2004 | New search has been performed | Searches conducted. Original co‐author has been removed (Lisa Bickford) and new co‐author, G Jenny Latte (GJL) added. Michael Draper repeated the original search strategy up to September 2003. Ruth Foxlee repeated the original search strategy up to February 2004. Jenny Latte repeated the original search strategy in EMBASE up to February 2004. One new included study was identified. Fourteen new studies which were excluded were identified. Confidence intervals (CI's) have been added to the results section at the request of a Feedback comment. |
| 5 January 2004 | Feedback has been incorporated | Reply to feedback added to review |
| 15 May 1999 | New search has been performed | Searches conducted |
Sources of support
Internal sources
No sources of support supplied
External sources
Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Review Group, Australia.
Withdrawn from publication for reasons stated in the review