|
|
||||||||
Letters and Responses |
We were glad when we discovered the article by Lenssinck et al, titled "Effect of Bracing and Other Conservative Interventions in the Treatment of Idiopathic Scoliosis in Adolescents: A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials," because it relates to a field that today is not adequately covered.1,2 However, we believe that there was a relative failure in collecting all of the relevant articles on the topic, which is a big methodological problem in a systematic review.
For instance, Lenssinck et al cited an article that was published by Weiss et al3 in the same volume of Pediatric Rehabilitation in which we published another systematic review on exercises4 that has been cited by the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), part of the Cochrane Library. In our review, we retrieved more articles thanks to a hand search and, I believe, a more extensive search of electronic databases. Lenssinck et al did not consider EMBASE, which, in the field of back problems, allows a searcher to almost double the number of relevant studies.5 By adding the search of systematic reviews on the topic to reach other relevant literature, as it usually must be done,5 Lenssinck et al could have included some additional relevant articles.
It is possible that not all of the studies that we considered in our previous systematic review4 could have been included by Lenssinck et al because of the strict inclusion criteria that they used; however, we wish we could have sent them an article by Ferraro et al,6 which they were not able to retrieve. This article was in our review and was published in the journal Europa Medicophysica, indexed in MEDLINE/PubMed since 2004, of which I am chief editor.7 The historical article by Stone et al,8 published in 1979 in Physical Therapy, also would have been very relevant to the topic, as well as those published by Ducongè9 and Mollon and Rodot.10 Those studies were controlled clinical trials, as defined by Lenssinck et al, and the citations are full-text articles, not abstracts.
In the end, Lenssinck and colleagues reached the same conclusions that we did in our systematic review.4 However, with the inclusion of these other articles, I believe that the authors' systematic review would have been more complete and would have had more strength.
Stefano Negrini, MD, is Scientific Director, ISICO (Italian Scientific Spine Institute), Milan, Italy; Chief Editor, Europa Medicophysica, Turin, Italy
References
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |