This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Dermatologic Disorders  • Bites and Stings  • Prognosis/ Outcomes  • Dermatologic Disorders, Other  • Drug Therapy  • Drug Therapy, Other  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Mark Strong, MBChB; Paul Johnstone, BM

Arch Dermatol. 2008;144(12):1640-1641.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In reply

Hu and Bibgy, in their excellent commentary on our systematic review, raise an important question as to when it is appropriate to combine heterogeneous studies within a single meta-analysis. Since research that evaluates treatments of scabies does not, unfortunately, attract the resources necessary to support large clinical trials, the evidence base in this area is relatively weak. This is despite the identification of important gaps in our knowledge in the original Cochrane systematic review of treatments for scabies published 11 years ago.¹

Studies in this field are generally small and vary in their methods and procedures, using different populations, drug regimens, measures of outcome, durations of follow-up, and other important study aspects. Therefore, accurately comparing the relative effectiveness of 2 alternative treatments, given results from several trials, is very difficult indeed.

In a random-effects meta-analysis, the treatment effects for individual trials are . . . [Full Text of this Article]

AUTHOR INFORMATION

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Treating Scabies: Results From an Updated Cochrane Review
Stephanie Hu and Michael Bigby
Arch Dermatol. 2008;144(12):1638-1640.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT