| Ref ID | 129 |
| First Author | K. Dwan |
| Journal | BMJ OPEN |
| Year Of Publishing | 2013 |
| URL | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/bmjopen/3/6/e002709.full.pdf |
| Keywords |
• Cochrane • Otolaryngology • Protocols • Multiplicity • Pulmonology |
| Problem(s) |
• Multiplicity of outcomes and lack of pre-specification for outcome reporting • Undocumented or unjustified deviations to the review protocol |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | United Kingdom |
| Aim | To assess outcome reporting bias across all efficacy outcomes in all Cochrane systematic reviews of cystic fibrosis published up to 2010. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | From the initial 46 identified systematic reviews, 39% (18/46) had a discrepancy in outcomes between a protocol and a full review. Between a review protocol and a full review, five (28%) listed all changes, two (11%) listed some changes and 11 reviews (61%) did not mention any change in outcomes. From comparison of the 37 included systematic reviews that were assessed for outcome reporting bias in trials, outcome reporting bias for primary outcomes was suspected in at least one trial in 86% of reviews. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 37 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 46 |