Advertisement

Journal of Bone and Mineral Metabolism

, Volume 37, Issue 6, pp 1104–1105 | Cite as

Systematic and meta-analytic analysis of cross-sectional and longitudinal explorations of bone health in youth with obesity: from methodological considerations to clinical relevance

  • D. ThivelEmail author
  • D. Courteix
  • E. Chaplais
  • B. Pereira
Letter to the Editor

Our team has recently performed a systematic and meta-analytic analyses of the literature related to the effects of multidisciplinary weight loss interventions on bone health in children and adolescents with obesity [1]. In a recent issue of the Journal of Bone and Mineral Metabolism, Alwardat and Alwardat commented on our work, nicely pointing the scientific and clinical interest of our review while stressing several methodological limitations [2].

We understand the points raised by Alwardat and Alwardat through their all commentary, highlighting some important methodological aspects of meta-analysis and systematic reviews’ processes that must be respected by authors to ensure the validity of such analyses and the strength of their conclusions. Although we want to thank the authors for their interest, we believe that their comments do not contribute to the scientific area, being moreover not adapted in most cases.

First, the author seems to suggest that we did employ a non-systematic...

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Chaplais E, Naughton G, Greene D, Dutheil F, Pereira B, Thivel D, Courteix D (2018) Effects of interventions with a physical activity component on bone health in obese children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Miner Metab 36:12–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alwardat M, Alwardat N (2019) Comment on: “Effects of interventions with a physical activity component on bone health in obese children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis”. J Bone Miner Metab 37:376–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sterne J, Higgins J, Reeves B, (eds) (2014) A Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool: for non-randomized studies of interventions (ACROBAT-NRSI). Version 1.0.0. http://www.riskofbias.info. Accessed 24 Sep 2014
  4. 4.
    Alwardat M, Etoom M (2018) Comments on: “Adapted physical activity and stroke: a systematic review”. J Sports Med Phys Fit 58:1889–1890Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alwardat M (2018) Comments on: “Positive effects of extracorporeal shock wave therapy on spasticity in post-stroke patients: a meta-analysis”. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 27:2046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Alwardat M (2018) Comments on: “Nordic walking for the management of people with parkinson disease: a systematic review”. PM&R 10:560–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alwardat M, Etoom M (2018) Comments on: ‘Effects of walking trainings on walking function among stroke survivors: a systematic review’. Int J Rehabil Res 41:186CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan KK, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. Thivel
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • D. Courteix
    • 1
    • 2
  • E. Chaplais
    • 3
  • B. Pereira
    • 4
  1. 1.Laboratory of the Metabolic Adaptations to Exercise Under Physiological and Pathological Conditions (AME2P), EA3533Clermont Auvergne UniversityClermont-FerrandFrance
  2. 2.Research Center for Human Nutrition Auvergne (CRNH Auvergne)Clermont-FerrandFrance
  3. 3.Laboratory of Development, Adaptation and Handicap (DevAH-EA 3450)Université de LorraineNancyFrance
  4. 4.Biostatistics Unit (DRCI)Clermont-Ferrand University HospitalClermont-FerrandFrance

Personalised recommendations