- Framework of problems / Objective
- Failure to define clinically meaningful outcomes
- Bias due to changes in specified outcomes during the systematic review process
| Ref ID | 539 |
| First Author | J. J. Kirkham |
| Journal | PLOS ONE |
| Year Of Publishing | 2010 |
| URL | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2842442/pdf/pone.0009810.pdf |
| Keywords |
Cochrane Protocols Multiplicity General medical |
| Problem(s) |
Undocumented or unjustified deviations to the review protocol Multiplicity of outcomes and lack of pre-specification for outcome reporting Failure to define clinically meaningful outcomes |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 297 |
| Summary of Findings | 22% of the 297 included protocol/review pairings contained a discrepancy in at least one outcome measure, of which 75% were attributable to changes in the primary outcome measure. Where lead authors could recall a reason for the discrepancy in the primary outcome, 29% of these reviews made changes after knowledge of the results from individual trials. Only 6% of reviews with an outcome discrepancy described the reason for the change in the review. |
| Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? | Yes |
| Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | No |