| Ref ID | 582 |
| First Author | A. J. de Craen |
| Journal | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY |
| Year Of Publishing | 2005 |
| URL | https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(04)00269-0/fulltext |
| Keywords |
• Cochrane • General medical • Risk of bias |
| Problem(s) |
• Meta-analyses and forest plots presented without considering risk of bias / quality |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | The Netherlands |
| Aim | To assess the incorporation of quality assessment into the analyses of 46 Cochrane and 27 non-Cochrane systematic reviews published in high impact reviews |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | Fifty percent of all Cochrane reviews and 61% of all paper reviews incorporated the results of the quality assessment in the analysis. Sensitivity analysis was the most common way of incorporating the results of the quality assessment in the analysis. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 73 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 104 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |