MP45-16 PHOTOSELECTIVE VAPORIZATION OF THE PROSTATE: FAVOURABILITY OF STUDY RESULTS AS A FUNCTION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND INDUSTRIAL SPONSORSHIP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
You have accessJournal of UrologyBenign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Surgical Therapy & New Technology III (MP45)1 Apr 2019MP45-16 PHOTOSELECTIVE VAPORIZATION OF THE PROSTATE: FAVOURABILITY OF STUDY RESULTS AS A FUNCTION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND INDUSTRIAL SPONSORSHIP Marian S. Wettstein*, Clinsy Pazhepurackel, Aline S. Neumann, Dixon T.S. Woon, Jaime O. Herrera-Caceres, Cédric Poyet, Tullio Sulser, Girish S. Kulkarni, and Thomas Hermanns Marian S. Wettstein*Marian S. Wettstein* More articles by this author , Clinsy PazhepurackelClinsy Pazhepurackel More articles by this author , Aline S. NeumannAline S. Neumann More articles by this author , Dixon T.S. WoonDixon T.S. Woon More articles by this author , Jaime O. Herrera-CaceresJaime O. Herrera-Caceres More articles by this author , Cédric PoyetCédric Poyet More articles by this author , Tullio SulserTullio Sulser More articles by this author , Girish S. KulkarniGirish S. Kulkarni More articles by this author , and Thomas HermannsThomas Hermanns More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0000556279.11152.58AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) with the so-called 532nm greenlight laser is an accepted treatment modality for non-neurogenic lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to prostate enlargement. Conflicts of interest (COIs) and industrial sponsorship (IS) have been shown to have a significant impact on the favourability of study results. The aim of the current study was to evaluate outcomes of comparative studies on PVP as a function of COIs and IS. METHODS: MEDLINE and EMBASE were systematically searched for records in English language. Comparative studies (randomized controlled trials [RCTs] and non-randomized comparative studies [NRCSs]), in which PVP was one treatment modality, were considered eligible. Sponsorship assessment distinguished between IS and non-industrial sponsoring. Two reviewers screened all abstracts and full-text articles independently. Disagreement was resolved either by discussion or by reference to a third independent reviewer. Favorability of outcome was evaluated on a binary scale (PVP-favourable versus PVP-unfavourable) by two independent board-certified urologists external to the remaining study team. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis. RESULTS: In total, 749 records were screened after manual deduplication. Of these, 286 articles were eligible for full-text screening. Full-text analysis identified 65 studies (25 RCTs [38%], 40 NRCSs [62%]). The majority of the studies mentioned the absence/presence of potential COIs (78%). In contrast, a sponsorship statement was only found in 29% of the investigations. Our analysis identified 56 conflicted authors. In 24 (37%) studies at least one COI was declared (range 1 to 18). Interestingly, searching the author lists of all included studies a second time for more occurrences of the 56 conflicted authors led to the identification 36 initially undeclared COIs in a total of 6 studies. Fifty-six (86%) and 9 (14%) of all included studies were rated as PVP-favourable and PVP-unfavourable, respectively. Among PVP-favourable studies, we could identify both a higher proportion of COI (39% vs. 32%) and IS (7% vs. 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Within the field of comparative PVP literature, COIs are not only highly prevalent but also more frequent in studies reporting PVP-favourable outcomes. IS was exclusively found in PVP-favourable studies. A majority of all RCTs and NRCSs on PVP mention the absence/presence of potential COIs. However, a sponsorship statement was identifiable in only about one third of all studies. Source of Funding: none Zurich, Switzerland; Toronto, Canada; Zurich, Switzerland; Toronto, Canada; Zurich, Switzerland© 2019 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 201Issue Supplement 4April 2019Page: e643-e643 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2019 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Marian S. Wettstein* More articles by this author Clinsy Pazhepurackel More articles by this author Aline S. Neumann More articles by this author Dixon T.S. Woon More articles by this author Jaime O. Herrera-Caceres More articles by this author Cédric Poyet More articles by this author Tullio Sulser More articles by this author Girish S. Kulkarni More articles by this author Thomas Hermanns More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".