- Framework of problems / Transparent
- Multiplicity of outcomes and lack of pre-specification for outcome reporting
- Methods to select results to include in meta-analyses deserve more consideration in systematic reviews
| Ref ID | 385 |
| First Author | M. J. Page |
| Journal | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY |
| Year Of Publishing | 2015 |
| URL | https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(15)00105-5/fulltext |
| Keywords |
• General medical • Cochrane • Multiplicity • Protocols |
| Problem(s) |
• No registered or published protocol • Multiplicity of outcomes and lack of pre-specification for outcome reporting |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 44 |
| Summary of Findings | Only 48% had a publicly available protocol. Multiplicity of results was common, occurring in 49% of trial reports. Pre-specification of decision rules to select results from multiple measurement scales and intervention/control groups (in multi-arm trials) was uncommon (19% and 14% of review protocols, respectively). Overall, 70% of reviews included at least one randomized controlled trial with multiplicity of results, but this occurred less frequently in reviews with a protocol. |
| Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? | N/A |
| Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | Yes |