Outcomes in Cochrane systematic reviews addressing four common eye conditions: an evaluation of completeness and comparability

Ref ID 571
First Author I. J. Saldanha
Journal PLOS ONE
Year Of Publishing 2014
URL https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25329377/
Keywords Cochrane
Multiplicity
Pre-specification
Ophthalmology
Problem(s) Multiplicity of outcomes and lack of pre-specification for outcome reporting
Number of systematic reviews included 57
Summary of Findings Five key outcome domains appeared 145 times across the 57 included Cochrane review protocols. Only 15/145 instances (10.3%) were completely specified (where all five elements of quality-of-life, visual acuity, intraocular pressure, disease progression, and contrast sensitivity). On average, the most common elements to be pre-specified were domain and time points. Primary outcomes were more completely specified than non-primary (median = four versus two elements). Quality-of-life was least completely specified (median = one element). Due to largely incomplete outcome pre-specification, conclusive assessment of comparability in outcome usage across the various protocols per condition was not possible.
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