Public comment period · §3
Draft synthesis: Acute pancreatitis with incretin-based… — disposition
The disposition of every submission and the amendments that resulted.
§3Disposition and amendments
§3.1Disposition table
Table 1. Every submission with its disposition. Each row links to the submission in full.
| Reference | Respondent | Point raised | Disposition |
|---|---|---|---|
| DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/002 | Dr Kamila Glendinning-Uche | The document is unreadable without specialist training | Accepted in part |
| DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/001 | Zdenka Ximenes | Baseline imbalance in a small contributing trial is not remarked on | Noted, no amendment |
| DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/008 | Dr Hamish Nyquist-Obiora | The review question is drawn too broadly to be answerable | Not accepted |
| DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/005 | Ludmila Brackenridge | Statistical heterogeneity is treated as though it measured clinical heterogeneity | Accepted in part |
| DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/007 | Dr Marisol Dunmore-Ekpo industry | The document should not describe uses outside the approved indication | Not accepted |
| DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/006 | Dr Fenella Lavrentiev | An indirect comparison is presented without an assessment of transitivity | Accepted |
| DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/003 | Dr Wilhelmina Wintringham | Risk-of-bias judgements are reported as an overall rating without the domains | Accepted |
| DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/010 | Dr Wilhelmina Erlingsson | The document set should be published in translation | Not accepted |
| DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/004 | Dr Matthias Whitmarsh-Obi | Quantitative claims are reproduced without the method that produced them | Accepted |
| DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/009 | Dr Adaeze Dunmore-Ekpo | A superseded version should remain reachable from the version that replaced it | Noted, no amendment |
| 10 submissions in total. | |||
§3.2Summary by disposition
Table 2. Counts by disposition, with the meaning of each.
| Disposition | Count | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Accepted | 3 | 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. |
| Accepted in part | 2 | Part 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 amendment | 2 | The 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 accepted | 3 | The 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
- The document is unreadable without specialist training — arising from DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/002. Every document now opens with a plain-language summary of not more than 150 words, placed above the technical abstract and carrying the same certainty language, so that the two cannot diverge.
- Statistical heterogeneity is treated as though it measured clinical heterogeneity — arising from DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/005. The decision to pool is now justified in prose against the population, intervention, comparator and outcome before any statistic is presented, and the heterogeneity statistic is reported with its confidence interval and a note of the number of contributing…
- An indirect comparison is presented without an assessment of transitivity — arising from DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/006. Transitivity is now assessed against a stated list of effect modifiers and reported before any indirect estimate, and where the assessment fails the contrast is reported as unestimable with the reason rather than estimated with a caveat.
- Risk-of-bias judgements are reported as an overall rating without the domains — arising from DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/003. Risk of bias is now reported at domain level for every included study, with the text on which each judgement was based quoted and referenced, and the overall judgement derived from the domains rather than asserted alongside them.
- Quantitative claims are reproduced without the method that produced them — arising from DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/004. 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.
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.
- 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.
Compound Evidence Institute · CEI-CP-115/3 · https://compoundevidence.com/comment-periods/draft-pancreatitis-risk-incretins-synthesis/disposition/ · retrieved 30 July 2026