- Framework of problems / Transparent
- Multiplicity of outcomes and lack of pre-specification for outcome reporting
- Exploring treatment by covariate interactions using subgroup analysis and meta-regression in cochrane reviews: a review of recent practice
Ref ID | 547 |
First Author | S. Donegan |
Journal | PLOS ONE |
Year Of Publishing | 2015 |
URL | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26029923/ |
Keywords |
Cochrane Multiplicity Statistical Pre-specification Subgroup General medical |
Problem(s) |
Multiplicity of outcomes and lack of pre-specification for outcome reporting Unplanned or unjustified subgroup or sensitivity analyses |
Number of systematic reviews included | 52 |
Summary of Findings | The type of analysis planned and the type subsequently applied (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analysis) was discrepant in 46% of reviews. No review reported how or why each covariate had been chosen; 42% of reviews did state each covariate a priori in the protocol but no review identified each post-hoc covariate as such. |
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 |