- Framework of problems / Transparent
- Undocumented or unjustified deviations to the review protocol
- Publishing protocols of systematic reviews: comparing what was done to what was planned
| Ref ID | 518 |
| First Author | C. A. Silagy |
| Journal | JAMA |
| Year Of Publishing | 2002 |
| URL | https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/194984/joc11902.pdf |
| Keywords |
• Protocols • Cochrane • General medical |
| Problem(s) |
• Undocumented or unjustified deviations to the review protocol |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 47 |
| Summary of Findings | 91% of reviews had at least one section that had undergone a major change compared with the most recently published protocol. The greatest variation between protocols and reviews was in the methods section in which 68% of reviews had undergone a major change. The authors highlight that changes made to the protocol that could have been based on prior knowledge of the results are of most concern. |
| 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 |