Cochrane Collaboration rejected the 2016 update for reasons that are
not related to the scientific validity of the review.
Our responses to the comments of
Nuala Livingstone and Toby Lasserson (Cochrane Central Editorial Unit)
are available here: https://www.mv.helsinki.fi/home/hemila/CC/CEU_responses.pdf
There are 43 responses by us and 27 of the are related to reporting and
do not challenge the validity of our review.
Some comments reveal that Nuala Livingstone and Toby Lasserson did not
properly read our update, see eg pages 9, 14, 19-21.
Before those two comments, we had received two comments from Cochrane
ARI group editors, and our responses to his comments are here: https://www.mv.helsinki.fi/home/hemila/CC/ARI_July2016_responses.pdf https://www.mv.helsinki.fi/home/hemila/CC/ARI_Oct2016_responses.pdf
In the July 2016 comments, we followed 18 of the 28 instructions and
asked for clarifications for 9 comments, since the ARI comments were
not always clear.
In the Oct 2016 there were 20 new comments and we followed 12
instructions and had a few questions for clarifications.