Non-Cochrane vs. Cochrane reviews were twice as likely to have positive conclusion statements: cross-sectional study

Ref ID 601
First Author A. C. Tricco
Journal JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
Year Of Publishing 2009
URL https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(08)00227-8/fulltext
Keywords • Influence
• Team
• Cochrane
• Spin
• General medical
• Non-Cochrane reviews
Problem(s) • Cochrane reviews more rigorous/higher quality than non-Cochrane reviews
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country Canada
Aim To assess factors that predict favourable results and positive conclusions in systematic reviews in both Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews
Level of Investigation Descriptive
Summary of Findings Non-Cochrane reviews were significantly more likely to contain positive conclusions than Cochrane reviewers. A higher proportion of Cochrane reviews had indeterminate conclusions,
Number of systematic reviews included 296
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 1046
Treatment impacted No
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description