- Framework of problems / Comprehensive
- Ignores setting or context of included studies which limits review applicability
- Reporting, handling and assessing the risk of bias associated with missing participant data in systematic reviews: a methodological survey
| Ref ID | 144 |
| First Author | E. A. Akl |
| Journal | BMJ OPEN |
| Year Of Publishing | 2015 |
| URL | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4593136/pdf/bmjopen-2015-009368.pdf |
| Keywords |
Cochrane Missing data Risk of bias General medical Non-Cochrane reviews |
| Problem(s) |
Failure to address missing outcome data in analyses Cochrane reviews more rigorous/higher quality than non-Cochrane reviews Ignores setting or context of included studies which limits review applicability Flawed risk of bias undertaken |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 202 |
| Summary of Findings | Of 98 Cochrane and 102 included non-Cochrane reviews, 47% and 7% (p<0.0001), respectively, reported on the number of participants with missing data, and 41% and 9% reported a plan for handling missing categorical data. 65% of reviews assessed risk of bias associated with missing data; this was associated with Cochrane reviews (relative to non- Cochrane: OR=6.63; 95% CI 2.50 to 17.57, p=0.0001), and the use of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology (OR=5.02; 95% CI 1.02 to 24.75, p=0.047). |
| 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 |