- Framework of problems / Objective
- Single reviewer / lack of double checking
- Poor reliability between Cochrane reviewers and blinded external reviewers when applying the Cochrane risk of bias tool in physical therapy trials
Ref ID | 563 |
First Author | S. Armijo-Olivo |
Journal | PLOS ONE |
Year Of Publishing | 2014 |
URL | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24824199/ |
Keywords |
Cochrane Inference Physiotherapy Team Single reviewer |
Problem(s) |
Single reviewer / lack of double checking Weaknesses identified in some Cochrane reviews |
Number of systematic reviews included | 17 |
Summary of Findings | Inter-rater reliability on the overall risk of bias and the individual domain assessment between Cochrane review authors and blinded external reviewers was poor. The inter-rater reliability between blinded external reviewers on the overall risk of bias rating was fair. The study proposes that risk of bias from published Cochrane review could in future be replicated consistently by an external panel of reviewers using consensus risk of bias assessments. |
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 |