Consultation record
Submissions accepted — page 7
The submission is accepted and the draft is amended as proposed. The amendment is recorded in the amendment log of the document it changed and is traceable to the numbered submission.
Submissions
681 documents · page 7 of 23
Table 1. Submissions with this disposition, on this page.
| Reference | Consultation | Respondent | Point raised |
|---|---|---|---|
| DRAFT-METHODOLOGY-/020 | Draft methodology document, version 4 | Dr Amara Vandergraaf | It is not clear which provisions bind the assessment committee |
| DRAFT-METHODOLOGY-/014 | Draft methodology document, version 4 | Dr Ngozi Zetterlund | The rating conflates absence of evidence with conflicting evidence |
| DRAFT-METHODOLOGY-/018 | Draft methodology document, version 4 | Dr Jolanta Uttridge | The same concept is given three different names in one document |
| DRAFT-METHODOLOGY-/006 | Draft methodology document, version 4 | Dr Frideswide Nordhagen | Screening is described in terms that two people would apply differently |
| DRAFT-METHODOLOGY-/010 | Draft methodology document, version 4 | Dr Ludmila Castellanos-Reid | The treatment of imprecision does not work where the event did not occur |
| DRAFT-METHODOLOGY-/005 | Draft methodology document, version 4 | Dr Valentin Castellanos-Reid industry | Two factual descriptions of the sponsor's programme are inaccurate |
| DRAFT-METHODOLOGY-/012 | Draft methodology document, version 4 | Dr Rukayat Zaleski-Mbeki | Quantitative claims are reproduced without the method that produced them |
| DRAFT-METHODOLOGY-/021 | Draft methodology document, version 4 | Dr Rosalind Grünbaum-Sowande | Quantitative claims are reproduced without the method that produced them |
| DRAFT-SUPPLIERS-CO/011 | Draft supplier comparison table | Dr Liesbeth Quenneville | The same quantity is presented differently in two series |
| DRAFT-SUPPLIERS-CO/002 | Draft supplier comparison table | Dr Liesbeth Achterberg | An identifier that encodes the document type will have to change when the type does |
| DRAFT-SUPPLIERS-CO/013 | Draft supplier comparison table | Dr Jolyon Grünbaum-Sowande | The default ordering of a comparison table carries an implication |
| DRAFT-SUPPLIERS-CO/007 | Draft supplier comparison table | Dr Nadezhda Lavrentiev | The registry is published only as pages and not in a form that can be processed |
| DRAFT-SUPPLIERS-CO/001 | Draft supplier comparison table | Dr Séverine Oduya-Kaltenbrunner | A printed copy loses the information that makes it checkable |
| DRAFT-SUPPLIERS-CO/010 | Draft supplier comparison table | Kolawole Jankowiak-Osei industry | Two factual descriptions of the sponsor's programme are inaccurate |
| DRAFT-RETATRUTIDE-/002 | Draft monograph: retatrutide | Quentin Gwynne-Sarpong | The analytical section assumes a reference standard that is not generally available |
| DRAFT-RETATRUTIDE-/011 | Draft monograph: retatrutide | Dr Thaddeus Isaksen-Balogun | The monograph does not tell a reader that a stated mass may be substantially counter-ion and water |
| DRAFT-RETATRUTIDE-/001 | Draft monograph: retatrutide | Dr Wolfram Kaltenbach-Mensah | The same concept is given three different names in one document |
| DRAFT-RETATRUTIDE-/008 | Draft monograph: retatrutide | Dr Mordecai Bellingham-Ojo | Evidence for one member of the class is presented as evidence for this compound |
| DRAFT-RETATRUTIDE-/009 | Draft monograph: retatrutide | Dr Lorcan Whitmarsh-Obi | Mechanistic claims for a peptide fragment are carried without evidence that the fragment acts as… |
| DRAFT-MELANOCORTIN/008 | Draft scoping review: melanocortin receptor agonists | Rosalind Petrossian | An indirect comparison is presented without an assessment of transitivity |
| DRAFT-MELANOCORTIN/006 | Draft scoping review: melanocortin receptor agonists | Dr Georgiana Mountstephen | Analytical surveys are treated as evidence about suppliers when they establish only what was in a… |
| DRAFT-MELANOCORTIN/004 | Draft scoping review: melanocortin receptor agonists | Dr Xenia Uttridge | The conclusion is stated more strongly than the certainty rating supports |
| DRAFT-MELANOCORTIN/011 | Draft scoping review: melanocortin receptor agonists | Dr Wolfram Kaltenbach-Mensah | The search date is not on the face of the document |
| DRAFT-SEARCH-STRAT/001 | Draft search-strategy template for the synthesis series | Dr Eamon Immelmann | The search date is not on the face of the document |
| DRAFT-SEARCH-STRAT/003 | Draft search-strategy template for the synthesis series | Dr Kamila Glendinning-Uche | Registry records without posted results are neither screened nor counted |
| DRAFT-SEARCH-STRAT/008 | Draft search-strategy template for the synthesis series | Dr Henrike Jastrzębska | It is not clear which provisions bind the assessment committee |
| DRAFT-SEARCH-STRAT/011 | Draft search-strategy template for the synthesis series | Valentin Tollemache industry | Two factual descriptions of the sponsor's programme are inaccurate |
| DRAFT-SEARCH-STRAT/013 | Draft search-strategy template for the synthesis series | Dr Hyacinth Drakeford-Amadi | Absence of evidence is presented in a form a reader will take as negative evidence |
| DRAFT-SEARCH-STRAT/006 | Draft search-strategy template for the synthesis series | Dr Gervase Crickhowell | Nothing prevents a conclusion stronger than its certainty rating |
| DRAFT-SEARCH-STRAT/018 | Draft search-strategy template for the synthesis series | Dr Eulalia Sonnenberg-Eze | The rating conflates absence of evidence with conflicting evidence |
page 7 of 23