Study | BMJ | Cochrane | HTA | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|
Dorr 1986 [22] | 7/39 vs 2/50 | 7/39 vs 2/50 | 7/39 vs 2/50 | Identical |
Skinner 1989 [17] | NR | 10/80 vs 11/100 | 11/89 vs 10*/91 | Skinner and Ravikumar only report percentages rather than event data and only Ravikumar reports numbers in each trial arm (denominator) |
(1-year data) | Â | Â | Â | |
 |  |  |  | Errors: |
Ravikumar 2000 [18] | 18/91 vs 12/89 | NR | 18/89 vs 12/91 | BMJ denominators for the 2 groups are the wrong way round; Cochrane generates its own denominators having failed to identify Ravikumar 2000 (follow-up to Skinner) |
(13-year data) | Â | Â | Â | |
Selection difference: | ||||
Numerators are all incorrect due to calculations based on percentages and incorrect denominators. | ||||
Baker 2006 [12] | 3/40 vs 0/41 | 3/40 vs 0/41 | 3/40 vs 0/41 | Identical |
Keating 2006 [11] | 3/69 vs 3/111 | 3/69 vs 2/69 | 3/69 vs 2/69 | Selection difference: |
BMJ alone analyses HA data from a separate trial arm (with 111 participants), but these data from this arm arguably should not be included in this analysis because different eligibility criteria were being applied (i.e. the surgeons and centres involved were either unwilling or unable to have participants randomised to THA). | ||||
Blomfeldt 2007 [9] | 0/60 vs 0/60 | 0/60 vs 0/60 | 0/60vs 0/60 | Identical |
Macaulay 2008 [23] | 1/17 vs 0/23 | 1/17 vs 0/23 | 1/17 vs 0/23 | Identical |
Mouzopoulos 2008 [8] | NR | NR | NR | NA |
 | 2/24 errors = 8 % | 2/24 errors = 8 % |  | 6 analysed studies = a/B vs c/D = 24 variables |
4/24 selection differences =17 % | 2/24 selection differences =8 % |