Table 1 Characteristics of the review and author characteristics relative to the conclusions
Characteristics | Number of conclusions | Favourable conclusions (% of type) | Non-favourable conclusions (% of type) |
|---|---|---|---|
Corresponding author | |||
Non-clinical | 40 | 13 (32%) | 27 (68%) |
Clinical | 19 | 12 (63%) | 7 (37%) |
Competing interests | |||
Declared none | 32 | 10 (31%) | 22 (69%) |
Declared | 8 | 6 (75%) | 2 (25%) |
No statement | 19 | 9 (47%) | 10 (53%) |
Type of evidence | |||
Both | 24 | 7 (29%) | 17 (71%) |
RCT only | 12 | 5 (42%) | 7 (58%) |
Non-RCT only | 20 | 11 (55%) | 9 (45%) |
Cost effectiveness | 3 | 2 (67%) | 1 (33%) |
Age groups | |||
Not specified/all ages | 22 | 7 (32%) | 15 (68%) |
Up to 49 | 10 | 4 (40%) | 6 (60%) |
50–69 | 22 | 10 (45%) | 12 (55%) |
70 and over | 5 | 4 (80%) | 1 (20%) |
Outcome measuresa | |||
Mortality | 38 | 19 (50%) | 19 (50%) |
Over-diagnosis | 25 | 8 (32%) | 17 (68%) |
Specific harms | 28 | 9 (32%) | 19 (68%) |
Cost effectiveness | 8 | 5 (62%) | 3 (38%) |
Meta-analysis | |||
No | 43 | 21 (49%) | 22 (51%) |
Yes | 16 | 4 (25%) | 12 (75%) |
Total | 59 | 25 (42%) | 34 (58%) |