- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review
- Incorporation of assessments of risk of bias of primary studies in systematic reviews of randomised trials: a cross-sectional study
| Ref ID | 125 |
| First Author | S. Hopewell |
| Journal | BMJ OPEN |
| Year Of Publishing | 2013 |
| URL | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3753473/pdf/bmjopen-2013-003342.pdf |
| Keywords |
Cochrane Risk of bias General medical Non-Cochrane reviews |
| Problem(s) |
Meta-analyses and forest plots presented without considering risk of bias / quality Limited quality assessment or no risk of bias Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review Cochrane reviews more rigorous/higher quality than non-Cochrane reviews |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 200 |
| Summary of Findings | Cochrane reviews routinely reported the method of risk of bias assessment and presented their results either in text or table format, however 20% of non- Cochrane reviews failed to report the method used and 39% did not present the assessment results. However, only 49% (n=40/81) of Cochrane and 20% (n=7/35) of non-Cochrane reviews incorporated the risk of bias assessment into the interpretation of the conclusions. |
| Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? | Not Applicable |
| Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | No |