How do systematic reviews incorporate risk of bias assessments into the synthesis of evidence? A methodological study

Ref ID 147
First Author S. V. Katikireddi
Journal J EPIDEMIOL COMMUNITY HEALTH
Year Of Publishing 2015
URL https://jech.bmj.com/content/jech/69/2/189.full.pdf
Keywords Cochrane
Risk of bias
General medical
Problem(s) Meta-analyses and forest plots presented without considering risk of bias / quality
Flawed risk of bias undertaken
Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review
Number of systematic reviews included 59
Summary of Findings Almost half of the 59 included systematic reviews reported critical appraisal in a manner that did not allow readers to determine which studies included in a review were most robust. Risk of bias assessments were not incorporated into synthesis in one-third (20) of the SRs, with their consideration more likely when reviews focused on randomised controlled trials. Common methods for incorporating critical appraisals into the synthesis process were sensitivity analysis, narrative discussion and exclusion of studies at high risk of bias. Nearly half of the reviews which investigated multiple outcomes and carried out study-level risk of bias summaries did not consider the potential for risk of bias to vary across outcomes.
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