Figure 3 is a PRISMA tree that describes the steps and yield from each stage of this review. We identified 6,163 abstracts of which we excluded 4,207 during title and abstract review. We reviewed the full text for 764 studies and excluded studies for the following reasons: publication or study type (268), population (193), intervention (98), comparison (87), and same data included in recent systematic reviews (17). We assessed the risk of bias of 96 articles and 6 systematic reviews. One of the systematic reviews published an update during the period of our review and so both the original and the newer publication were evaluated for risk of bias. We excluded 24 articles from the analysis that were considered high risk of bias for benefits. One of these articles was included for harms. We included 59 studies (73 publications) and 5 systematic reviews in this report. Of the 73 included articles, 56 were included in one of the systematic reviews included as evidence and 17 were newly identified by our review team.

Figure 3Disposition of articles on otitis media with effusion

a We accepted the risk of bias assessment conducted by the review authors for the studies included in one of the 5 earlier systematic reviews (56 articles). We conducted our own risk of bias assessment for 17 new articles not included in one of those reviews.

b One of the 5 included systematic reviews was updated during our peer review period. We reviewed both the original report and the update.

From: Results

Cover of Otitis Media With Effusion: Comparative Effectiveness of Treatments
Otitis Media With Effusion: Comparative Effectiveness of Treatments [Internet].
Comparative Effectiveness Reviews, No. 101.
Berkman ND, Wallace IF, Steiner MJ, et al.

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.