RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.
Comparative effectiveness reviews and the impact of funding bias.
Gartlehner, G., & Fleg, A. (2010). Comparative effectiveness reviews and the impact of funding bias.Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(6), 589-590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.01.004
To estimate the impact of funding bias on results and conclusions of comparative effectiveness reviews (CERs), we have reanalyzed data of a recent CER on second-generation antidepressants [ [1] ]. A limitation of our study was the underlying premise that no substantial differences in efficacy exist among second-generation antidepressants. Although most systematic reviews support similarity in efficacy, a recent study has raised doubts about the correctness of this assumption
