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: Acute pancreatitis with incretin-based… — disposition

The disposition of every submission and the amendments that resulted.

Document identifier
CEI-CP-115/3
Series
Public comment period
Version
1.0
Published
04 Jan 2025
Last reviewed
04 Jan 2025
Next review
04 Jan 2026
Identifier
10.71829/cei.cp.115
Certainty
Not rated
Cycle
2024 Q4
Window
22 Oct 2024 – 17 Dec 2024
Status
Closed
Submissions
10

§3Disposition and amendments

§3.1Disposition table

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

ReferenceRespondentPoint raisedDisposition
DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/001Dr Kolawole Isaksen-BalogunA single-trial result is presented in the visual form of a pooled estimateAccepted
DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/002Dr Emiliana OllerenshawStudies not published in English were excluded without assessmentAccepted in part
DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/003Dr Zdenka Nyquist-ObioraDoses differing several-fold are pooled without examining dose-responseAccepted
DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/004Dr Jozef Brandvold-AchterbergThe review question is drawn too broadly to be answerableNot accepted
DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/005Dr Georgiana MountstephenDeclared interests should appear on the document rather than on a separate pageNoted, no amendment
DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/006Dr Ivo QuintanilhaResults at materially different follow-up durations are pooledAccepted
DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/007Dr Adaeze Underhill-OkaforTwo included studies do not meet the registered eligibility criteriaAccepted in part
DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/008Dr Vasilisa ImmelmannRegulatory assessment documents were not searchedAccepted in part
DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/009Eamon Sandringham-AduReferences should carry a persistent identifier for every cited sourceAccepted in part
DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/010Dr Yaa KettlewellThe timepoint at which each outcome was extracted was chosen after the data were seenAccepted
10 submissions in total.

§3.2Summary by disposition

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

DispositionCountMeaning
Accepted4The 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. A single-trial result is presented in the visual form of a pooled estimate — arising from DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/001. 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.
  2. Studies not published in English were excluded without assessment — arising from DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/002. Language restriction is removed from the protocol for the series, the records previously excluded on that ground are listed with their screening outcome, and the residual limitation is stated in the abstract of this review.
  3. Doses differing several-fold are pooled without examining dose-response — arising from DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/003. Estimates are now reported by dose group, a dose-response examination is reported where three or more dose levels contribute, and the pooled across-dose estimate is removed rather than retained alongside.
  4. Results at materially different follow-up durations are pooled — arising from DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/006. Estimates are now reported by duration band, with the number of contributing trials and participants in each band stated, and no estimate is pooled across bands.
  5. Two included studies do not meet the registered eligibility criteria — arising from DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/007. 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…
  6. Regulatory assessment documents were not searched — arising from DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/008. 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…
  7. References should carry a persistent identifier for every cited source — arising from DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/009. 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.
  8. The timepoint at which each outcome was extracted was chosen after the data were seen — arising from DRAFT-PANCREATITIS/010. The extraction timepoint is now prespecified in the protocol for new reviews. Where a review predates the requirement, estimates are reported at every timepoint the contributing trials report.

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.