- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- Flawed risk of bias undertaken
- The judgement of biases included in the category “other bias” in Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions: a systematic survey
Ref ID | 442 |
First Author | A. Babic |
Journal | BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY |
Year Of Publishing | 2019 |
URL | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6458756/pdf/12874_2019_Article_718.pdf |
Keywords |
Cochrane Risk of bias General medical |
Problem(s) |
Flawed risk of bias undertaken Weaknesses identified in some Cochrane reviews |
Number of systematic reviews included | 768 |
Summary of Findings | Insufficient and unclear reporting of the ‘other bias’ domain was very common in the Cochrane reviews analysed. 78% of included Cochrane reviews used the ‘other bias’ domain in the risk of bias assessment. The judgments of the same supporting explanations were highly inconsistent and were grouped into 31 types. There were numerous other inconsistencies in reporting of sources of other bias in Cochrane reviews. |
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? | Yes |