- Framework of problems / Comprehensive
- Grey literature excluded
- 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 |