Conceptual, Statistical and Clinical interpretation of results from A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Cryosurgery combined with Topical interventions for Actinic Keratosis

Abstract

Furthermore, when conducting meta‐analysis by pooling studies, the studies should be analysing the outcome of the same input effect (for ex. in a meta‐analysis regarding efficacy of two treatments A & B, you cannot pool the results of a cohort that received treatment A with one that received treatment B, even though the outcome of both cohorts is measured in terms of Risk Ratio). Heppt et al.'s meta‐analysis fails to comply with said point. In Fig.3 of Heppt et al.'s manuscript, we observe that studies assessing different treatments (5‐FU, Imiquinod, Ingenol Mebutate, Diclofenac and ALA‐PDT) have been pooled, to determine the overall Risk Ratio, which is incorrect.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

http://bit.ly/2N7wW82