Public comment period · §3
Draft synthesis: Counter-ion content and its effect on… — 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-COUNTERION-C/001 | Ms Rhiannon Okoye-Vandergraaf | The document is unreadable without specialist training | Accepted in part |
| DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/002 | Dr Matthias Wintringham industry | The document should not describe uses outside the approved indication | Not accepted |
| DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/003 | Stellan Cholmondeley-Ade | References should carry a persistent identifier for every cited source | Accepted in part |
| DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/004 | Dr Ivo Quintanilha | Risk-of-bias judgements are reported as an overall rating without the domains | Accepted |
| DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/005 | Dr Oswin Yorkstone | Whether the analyst knew the source of each sample is not reported | Noted, no amendment |
| DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/006 | Thaddeus Isaksen-Balogun | Studies using different outcome definitions are pooled into one estimate | Accepted |
| DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/007 | Dr Eamon Immelmann | The chain of custody between purchase and analysis is not described | Noted, no amendment |
| DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/008 | Professor Bartolomeu Nkosi-Lindegaard | Contributing surveys anonymise their sources to different degrees | Noted, no amendment |
| DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/009 | Dr Vasilisa Immelmann | Regulatory assessment documents were not searched | Accepted in part |
| DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/010 | Ivo Mountstephen | A superseded version should remain reachable from the version that replaced it | Noted, no amendment |
| DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/011 | Dr Yaa Kettlewell | A funnel plot is presented for a set too small to interpret it | Accepted |
| DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/012 | Quentin Whitmarsh-Obi | The search strategy as published cannot be re-run | Accepted |
| DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/013 | Dr Ndidi Ravensworth-Ilunga | The sampling frame of each contributing survey is not reported | Accepted |
| DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/014 | Dr Jozef Brandvold-Achterberg | The conclusion is stated more strongly than the certainty rating supports | Accepted |
| DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/015 | Dr Melisande Kirkpatrick-Ola | Two included studies do not meet the registered eligibility criteria | Accepted in part |
| DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/016 | Dr Quentin Zimmerthal | Results obtained by different methods are pooled without recording the method | Accepted |
| 16 submissions in total. | |||
§3.2Summary by disposition
Table 2. Counts by disposition, with the meaning of each.
| Disposition | Count | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Accepted | 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. |
| Accepted in part | 4 | 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 | 4 | 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 | 1 | 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-COUNTERION-C/001. 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.
- References should carry a persistent identifier for every cited source — arising from DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/003. Every reference without a persistent identifier now carries an explicit statement that the identifier is not held by the Institute, so that its absence is a recorded fact rather than an apparent oversight.
- Risk-of-bias judgements are reported as an overall rating without the domains — arising from DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/004. 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.
- Studies using different outcome definitions are pooled into one estimate — arising from DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/006. 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.
- Regulatory assessment documents were not searched — arising from DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/009. 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…
- A funnel plot is presented for a set too small to interpret it — arising from DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/011. The funnel plot is removed for every outcome contributed by fewer than ten studies, and replaced by a statement that small-study effects could not be assessed at that number, together with the count of registered trials identified without posted results.
- The search strategy as published cannot be re-run — arising from DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/012. The full line-by-line strategy for each database is now published with the interface, the run date and the yield at each line, and the total retrieved is reconciled against the screening flow.
- The sampling frame of each contributing survey is not reported — arising from DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/013. Every contributing survey now carries a sampling row stating the frame, the number of sources approached and the number supplying, and the synthesis reports separately for surveys whose frames are not comparable.
- The conclusion is stated more strongly than the certainty rating supports — arising from DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/014. Conclusion wording is now drawn from a fixed set of formulations tied to the certainty rating, so that a low certainty rating produces a statement that the evidence may suggest an effect and that the estimate is likely to change with further research.
- Two included studies do not meet the registered eligibility criteria — arising from DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/015. One study has been removed from the included set and the estimate recomputed, the exclusion reason for the third study has been corrected in the excluded-studies table, and the screening decisions are now recorded against the protocol version in force at the…
- Results obtained by different methods are pooled without recording the method — arising from DRAFT-COUNTERION-C/016. Every contributing result now carries its determination, pooling occurs only within a determination, and where a survey did not report the method the result is listed as method not stated and excluded from the pooled estimates.
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-106/3 · https://compoundevidence.com/comment-periods/draft-counterion-content-underreporting-synthesis/disposition/ · retrieved 30 July 2026