Andreas Lundh - Academia.edu (original) (raw)
Papers by Andreas Lundh
BMJ, 2014
Objective To determine, using research on duloxetine for major depressive disorder as an example,... more Objective To determine, using research on duloxetine for major depressive disorder as an example, if there are inconsistencies between protocols, clinical study reports, and main publicly available sources (journal articles and trial registries), and within clinical study reports themselves, with respect to benefits and major harms.
BMJ, 2014
Objective To assess the effects of coding and coding conventions on summaries and tabulations of ... more Objective To assess the effects of coding and coding conventions on summaries and tabulations of adverse events data on suicidality within clinical study reports.
Danish medical bulletin, 2011
Case reports are often regarded as second-class research, but are an important part of medical sc... more Case reports are often regarded as second-class research, but are an important part of medical science as they often present first evidence of new discoveries. We here describe the type of case reports published in a Danish general medical journal. We included all case reports published in Ugeskrift for Laeger in 2009. For each report, two authors extracted information on study characteristics and classified the relevance and the role of the report. We included 139 case reports written in Danish. Thirty-nine (28%) were of general relevance and 100 (72%) of speciality relevance. The median number of authors was three (range: 1-7). The first author was a non-specialist physician in 119 (86%) of the reports and the last author a specialist in 103 (78%). A total of 124 (89%) reports had an educational role, six (4%) dealt with new diseases, two (1%) with new side effects, three (2%) with new mechanisms and four (3%) were curiosities. A total of 59 (42%) reports were surgical, 64 (46%) n...
![Research paper thumbnail of [Emergency department X-rays requested by physicians or nurses]](https://a.academia-assets.com/images/blank-paper.jpg)
](Ugeskrift for laeger, Jan 18, 2009
Triage nurse requested x-rays reduce waiting-time in the emergency department. Does triage nurse ... more Triage nurse requested x-rays reduce waiting-time in the emergency department. Does triage nurse requested x-rays in the emergency department save time for patients with a defined group of low-energy injuries without compromising treatment quality or patient satisfaction? Analysis of data from a randomized study including a defined group of low-energy injuries in patients at the emergency department requiring x-ray investigation. A total of 58 patients were included in the intervention group and 48 in the control group. For 50% of the patients, waiting-time from admittance to x-ray request was reduced from 17 to 9 minutes when x-rays were requested by a nurse vs. a physician, and for 75% waiting-time was reduced from 35 to 14 minutes. Time reduction was also found in time from admittance to the patient returned from x-ray examination. Waiting-time was reduced from 56 to 32 minutes, and for 75% of the patients the waiting-time was reduced from 90 to 66 minutes when x-ray was requeste...
Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, Jan 11, 2014
To determine the prevalence of conflicts of interest (COIs) among Danish physicians who are autho... more To determine the prevalence of conflicts of interest (COIs) among Danish physicians who are authors of clinical drug trial reports and determine the extent of undisclosed COIs in trial publications. Cross-sectional study. The 100 most recent drug trial reports with at least one Danish non-industry employed physician author published in a journal adhering to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' (ICMJE) manuscript guidelines. For each article, two observers independently extracted trial characteristics and the authors' COIs. Disclosed COIs were compared to what was registered on the Danish Health and Medicines Authority's public disclosure list. Trial authors who are Danish physicians. Number of disclosed and undisclosed COIs. One observer screened 928 articles and two observers assessed 120 articles for eligibility. The 100 included trials were published from February 2011 to May 2013 and included 318 Danish non-industry employed authors. Eighty-six of ...
Trials, 2012
Background: Bias in industry-sponsored trials is common and the interpretation of the results can... more Background: Bias in industry-sponsored trials is common and the interpretation of the results can be particularly distorted in favour of the sponsor's product. We investigated sponsors' involvement in the conduct and reporting of industry-sponsored trials.
Cancer Treatment Reviews, 2009
Background: To ensure evidence-based decision making in pediatric oncology systematic reviews are... more Background: To ensure evidence-based decision making in pediatric oncology systematic reviews are necessary. The objective of our study was to evaluate the methodological quality of all currently existing systematic reviews in pediatric oncology. Methods: We identified eligible systematic reviews through a systematic search of the literature. Data on clinical and methodological characteristics of the included systematic reviews were extracted. The methodological quality of the included systematic reviews was assessed using the overview quality assessment questionnaire, a validated 10-item quality assessment tool. We compared the methodological quality of systematic reviews published in regular journals with that of Cochrane systematic reviews. Results: We included 117 systematic reviews, 99 systematic reviews published in regular journals and 18 Cochrane systematic reviews. The average methodological quality of systematic reviews was low for all ten items, but the quality of Cochrane systematic reviews was significantly higher than systematic reviews published in regular journals. On a 1-7 scale, the median overall quality score for all systematic reviews was 2 (range 1-7), with a score of 1 (range 1-7) for systematic reviews in regular journals compared to 6 (range 3-7) in Cochrane systematic reviews (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Most systematic reviews in the field of pediatric oncology seem to have serious methodological flaws leading to a high risk of bias. While Cochrane systematic reviews were of higher methodological quality than systematic reviews in regular journals, some of them also had methodological problems. Therefore, the methodology of each individual systematic review should be scrutinized before accepting its results.
BMJ, 2014
Objective To determine, using research on duloxetine for major depressive disorder as an example,... more Objective To determine, using research on duloxetine for major depressive disorder as an example, if there are inconsistencies between protocols, clinical study reports, and main publicly available sources (journal articles and trial registries), and within clinical study reports themselves, with respect to benefits and major harms.
BMJ, 2014
Objective To determine, using research on duloxetine for major depressive disorder as an example,... more Objective To determine, using research on duloxetine for major depressive disorder as an example, if there are inconsistencies between protocols, clinical study reports, and main publicly available sources (journal articles and trial registries), and within clinical study reports themselves, with respect to benefits and major harms.
BMJ, 2014
Objective To assess the effects of coding and coding conventions on summaries and tabulations of ... more Objective To assess the effects of coding and coding conventions on summaries and tabulations of adverse events data on suicidality within clinical study reports.
Danish medical bulletin, 2011
Case reports are often regarded as second-class research, but are an important part of medical sc... more Case reports are often regarded as second-class research, but are an important part of medical science as they often present first evidence of new discoveries. We here describe the type of case reports published in a Danish general medical journal. We included all case reports published in Ugeskrift for Laeger in 2009. For each report, two authors extracted information on study characteristics and classified the relevance and the role of the report. We included 139 case reports written in Danish. Thirty-nine (28%) were of general relevance and 100 (72%) of speciality relevance. The median number of authors was three (range: 1-7). The first author was a non-specialist physician in 119 (86%) of the reports and the last author a specialist in 103 (78%). A total of 124 (89%) reports had an educational role, six (4%) dealt with new diseases, two (1%) with new side effects, three (2%) with new mechanisms and four (3%) were curiosities. A total of 59 (42%) reports were surgical, 64 (46%) n...
Ugeskrift for laeger, Jan 18, 2009
Triage nurse requested x-rays reduce waiting-time in the emergency department. Does triage nurse ... more Triage nurse requested x-rays reduce waiting-time in the emergency department. Does triage nurse requested x-rays in the emergency department save time for patients with a defined group of low-energy injuries without compromising treatment quality or patient satisfaction? Analysis of data from a randomized study including a defined group of low-energy injuries in patients at the emergency department requiring x-ray investigation. A total of 58 patients were included in the intervention group and 48 in the control group. For 50% of the patients, waiting-time from admittance to x-ray request was reduced from 17 to 9 minutes when x-rays were requested by a nurse vs. a physician, and for 75% waiting-time was reduced from 35 to 14 minutes. Time reduction was also found in time from admittance to the patient returned from x-ray examination. Waiting-time was reduced from 56 to 32 minutes, and for 75% of the patients the waiting-time was reduced from 90 to 66 minutes when x-ray was requeste...
Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, Jan 11, 2014
To determine the prevalence of conflicts of interest (COIs) among Danish physicians who are autho... more To determine the prevalence of conflicts of interest (COIs) among Danish physicians who are authors of clinical drug trial reports and determine the extent of undisclosed COIs in trial publications. Cross-sectional study. The 100 most recent drug trial reports with at least one Danish non-industry employed physician author published in a journal adhering to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' (ICMJE) manuscript guidelines. For each article, two observers independently extracted trial characteristics and the authors' COIs. Disclosed COIs were compared to what was registered on the Danish Health and Medicines Authority's public disclosure list. Trial authors who are Danish physicians. Number of disclosed and undisclosed COIs. One observer screened 928 articles and two observers assessed 120 articles for eligibility. The 100 included trials were published from February 2011 to May 2013 and included 318 Danish non-industry employed authors. Eighty-six of ...
Trials, 2012
Background: Bias in industry-sponsored trials is common and the interpretation of the results can... more Background: Bias in industry-sponsored trials is common and the interpretation of the results can be particularly distorted in favour of the sponsor's product. We investigated sponsors' involvement in the conduct and reporting of industry-sponsored trials.
Cancer Treatment Reviews, 2009
Background: To ensure evidence-based decision making in pediatric oncology systematic reviews are... more Background: To ensure evidence-based decision making in pediatric oncology systematic reviews are necessary. The objective of our study was to evaluate the methodological quality of all currently existing systematic reviews in pediatric oncology. Methods: We identified eligible systematic reviews through a systematic search of the literature. Data on clinical and methodological characteristics of the included systematic reviews were extracted. The methodological quality of the included systematic reviews was assessed using the overview quality assessment questionnaire, a validated 10-item quality assessment tool. We compared the methodological quality of systematic reviews published in regular journals with that of Cochrane systematic reviews. Results: We included 117 systematic reviews, 99 systematic reviews published in regular journals and 18 Cochrane systematic reviews. The average methodological quality of systematic reviews was low for all ten items, but the quality of Cochrane systematic reviews was significantly higher than systematic reviews published in regular journals. On a 1-7 scale, the median overall quality score for all systematic reviews was 2 (range 1-7), with a score of 1 (range 1-7) for systematic reviews in regular journals compared to 6 (range 3-7) in Cochrane systematic reviews (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Most systematic reviews in the field of pediatric oncology seem to have serious methodological flaws leading to a high risk of bias. While Cochrane systematic reviews were of higher methodological quality than systematic reviews in regular journals, some of them also had methodological problems. Therefore, the methodology of each individual systematic review should be scrutinized before accepting its results.
BMJ, 2014
Objective To determine, using research on duloxetine for major depressive disorder as an example,... more Objective To determine, using research on duloxetine for major depressive disorder as an example, if there are inconsistencies between protocols, clinical study reports, and main publicly available sources (journal articles and trial registries), and within clinical study reports themselves, with respect to benefits and major harms.