| Ref ID | 359 |
| First Author | L. A. Kahale |
| Journal | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY |
| Year Of Publishing | 2018 |
| URL | https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(17)31397-5/fulltext |
| Keywords |
• General medical • Missing data • Cochrane |
| Problem(s) |
• Failure to address missing outcome data in analyses |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | Lebanon |
| Aim | To assess how systematic review authors report and address categories of participants with potential missing outcome data of trial participants from a random sample of 50 Cochrane and 50 non-Cochrane systematic reviews published in 2012. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | Whilst 42 of 100 systematic reviews reported on at least one of the 10 predefined categories of missing outcome data, only 19 reported plans for handling missing outcome data in their analyses. Although 87 reviews addressed risk of bias associated with missing outcome data at the trial level, only nine reported conducting sensitivity analysis as a way to judge risk of bias associated with missing outcome data at the level of the meta-analysis. Of these, only five reported the results of their analysis. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 100 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 1137 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |