Independent · non-commercial · publishes on a quarterly cycle|Current cycle 2026 Q3
Compound Evidence InstituteEvidence synthesis · established 2023Graded assessments of compounds, trials, methods and supply
Document set current to 30 July 2026
Public comment period · §3

Draft synthesis: incretin receptor agonists for metabolic… — disposition

The disposition of every submission and the amendments that resulted.

Document identifier
CEI-CP-025/3
Series
Public comment period
Version
1.0
Published
12 Jul 2026
Last reviewed
12 Jul 2026
Next review
12 Jul 2027
Identifier
10.71829/cei.cp.25
Certainty
Not rated
Cycle
2026 Q2
Window
29 Apr 2026 – 10 Jun 2026
Status
Closed
Submissions
12

§3Disposition and amendments

§3.1Disposition table

Table 1. Every submission with its disposition. Each row links to the submission in full.

ReferenceRespondentPoint raisedDisposition
DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/002Dr Sigrún LavrentievQuantitative claims are reproduced without the method that produced themAccepted
DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/005Dr Katarzyna YorkstonePoint estimates are given without an intervalAccepted in part
DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/008Dr Amara QuaresmaStudies using different outcome definitions are pooled into one estimateAccepted
DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/007Yusuf Whitmarsh-ObiThe choice of effect measure is not justified and changes the appearance of the resultAccepted in part
DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/010Dr Wolfram Kaltenbach-MensahThe search date is not on the face of the documentAccepted
DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/009Dr Amara VandergraafA single-trial result is presented in the visual form of a pooled estimateAccepted
DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/003Dr Mordecai Bellingham-OjoA sortable table implies a comparison the underlying data do not supportNoted, no amendment
DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/011Dr Fenella LavrentievIntention-to-treat and efficacy-estimand results are combined without distinctionAccepted
DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/004Dr Jacinta Steenkamp-FerreiraThe review question is drawn too broadly to be answerableNot accepted
DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/001Radoslava Palmgren-KofiSubgroup findings are reported that were not registered in the protocolAccepted in part
DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/006Dr Lorcan Zaleski-MbekiRegulatory assessment documents were not searchedAccepted in part
DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/012Ludmila Brackenridge industryTwo factual descriptions of the sponsor's programme are inaccurateAccepted
12 submissions in total.

§3.2Summary by disposition

Table 2. Counts by disposition, with the meaning of each.

DispositionCountMeaning
Accepted6The 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.
Accepted in part4Part of the submission is accepted and part is not. The secretariat response states which part is which and on what ground the remainder was declined.
Noted, no amendment1The submission raises a point the Institute accepts but that does not require a change to the draft, most often because the draft already states it elsewhere. The location is given in the response.
Not accepted1The submission is not accepted. The secretariat response gives the reason. A submission that is not accepted remains published in full; the Institute does not remove a submission because it disagrees with it.

§3.3Resulting amendments

  1. Quantitative claims are reproduced without the method that produced them — arising from DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/002. Every quantitative claim now carries the determination that produced it at the point of use, and figures obtained by non-comparable methods are no longer presented in the same row or sentence.
  2. Point estimates are given without an interval — arising from DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/005. Every estimate now carries its interval where the source reported one, and where it did not, the estimate is annotated as reported without an interval rather than left to appear as a precise figure.
  3. Studies using different outcome definitions are pooled into one estimate — arising from DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/008. Studies are now pooled only within an outcome definition, each definition is reported with its own estimate and certainty rating, and the summary of findings states which definition each row concerns.
  4. The choice of effect measure is not justified and changes the appearance of the result — arising from DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/007. Every outcome now reports the relative effect and, where an assumed baseline risk can be stated and sourced, the corresponding absolute effect, with the baseline risk and its source given in the same row.
  5. The search date is not on the face of the document — arising from DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/010. The search date is now printed adjacent to every certainty rating and is carried in the document metadata, so that the interval between the search and the reading is visible without reference to the methods section.
  6. A single-trial result is presented in the visual form of a pooled estimate — arising from DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/009. Outcomes contributed by a single trial are now reported without a pooled diamond, labelled as unreplicated, and downgraded for imprecision or inconsistency according to the framework rather than presented as a synthesis.
  7. Intention-to-treat and efficacy-estimand results are combined without distinction — arising from DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/011. The treatment-policy estimand is used throughout as the primary analysis, the efficacy estimand is reported as a secondary analysis where available, and the estimand used is stated in every row of the summary of findings.
  8. Subgroup findings are reported that were not registered in the protocol — arising from DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/001. Every subgroup analysis is now labelled as pre-specified or post hoc against the registered protocol, post hoc analyses are reported in a separate subsection without a certainty rating, and the protocol version against which the labelling was made is stated.
  9. Regulatory assessment documents were not searched — arising from DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/006. Published regulatory assessment documents are now searched as a named source, are reported as a distinct evidence class in the included-studies table, and contribute to the assessment while being excluded from pooled estimates where risk of bias could not be…
  10. Two factual descriptions of the sponsor's programme are inaccurate — arising from DRAFT-MASH-SYNTHES/012. The trial status now reads as completed at a pre-specified interim analysis, with the analysis identified, and the dose is stated in the unit used in the approved labelling. The submission is identified as an industry submission on its face in accordance with…

References cited on this page

References are numbered in order of first citation in this document. Each superscript in the text links to its entry below.

  1. International Organization for Standardization. ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories. ISO/IEC Standard 2017;3rd edition. identifier not held by the Institute

Identifiers are reproduced only where the Institute holds them. Where a digital object identifier or PubMed identifier is not shown, the Institute has recorded the journal and year and has not constructed an identifier.

Nothing published by the Institute is medical advice, a diagnosis, a prescription, a treatment recommendation or a purchasing recommendation. Compounds supplied for research use are not approved for human or veterinary use in any jurisdiction, and a favourable analytical assessment of a supplier is not a statement that any product is safe or effective. The Institute publishes certainty ratings and never recommendations. No telephone number, messaging handle or ordering channel appears anywhere on this site.