Can trial quality be reliably assessed from published reports of cancer trials: evaluation of risk of bias assessments in systematic reviews

Ref ID 456
First Author C. L. Vale
Journal BMJ
Year Of Publishing 2013
URL https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/16260401.pdf
Keywords Grey literature
Oncology
Problem(s) Grey literature excluded
Number of systematic reviews included 13
Summary of Findings Supplementary information reduced the proportion of unclear assessments for all individual risk of bias domains, consequently increasing the number of trials assessed as low risk of bias (and therefore available for inclusion in meta-analyses) from 23% based on publications alone to 66% based on publications with additional information.
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