Specifically in analyses of childhood/adolescent circumcision and invasive cancer, all three included studies had a high risk of length bias.
Specific criteria for assessing risk of bias are included in the supplementary material; of note where 20% or more identified prevalent cases could not be contacted, studies were considered to be at high risk of length bias (survival bias).
Only two studies were confined to incident cases due to the rarity of penile cancer and in the studies which included at least some prevalent cases, risk of length (survival) bias was considered to be high.
The absence of any effect of an initial assessment of risk on length of stay merits some comment.
What is the effect of medical injury on risk of mortality, length of stay in hospital and associated costs?
Prior studies evaluating the use of CRP in the acute setting vary with the risk of disease, length of follow-up, and type of CRP testing utilized.
Although cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) has been associated with perioperative morbidity, data are lacking regarding the risk of prolonged length of stay (pLOS) and delay to receipt of systemic therapy (ST).
Some studies recommended bony fusion as early as possible in the management of such cases to avoid recurrence [10] but early ankle fusion is associated with a risk of limb length discrepancy or deformity if the distal tibial physis is injured, a loss of ankle movement and abnormal stresses on the growing limb [9, 10].
Number randomized, superiority of treatment versus control (Hedges g) on primary outcome measure, risk of bias, length of follow up, patient adherence and satisfaction were extracted.
Results of the meta-analysis of the 22 studies [22] [43] are displayed in Table 1: grouped by diagnosis, listing author and date of publication, N randomized, effect size of intervention compared to control condition (Hedges g), NNT, risk of bias; length of follow-up; and adherence and patient satisfaction as a proxy for acceptability.
Subgroup analyses of the trials according to risk of bias, length of study, and source of funding showed no statistically significant differences between subgroups.
