- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- Cochrane reviews more rigorous/higher quality than non-Cochrane reviews
- Cochrane reviews used more rigorous methods than non-Cochrane reviews: survey of systematic reviews in physiotherapy
| Ref ID | 616 |
| First Author | A. M. Moseley |
| Journal | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY |
| Year Of Publishing | 2009 |
| URL | https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(08)00332-6/fulltext |
| Keywords |
Cochrane General medical Non-Cochrane reviews |
| Problem(s) |
Cochrane reviews more rigorous/higher quality than non-Cochrane reviews |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 200 |
| Summary of Findings | Cochrane reviews searched more databases and were more likely to have assessed trial quality, reported dichotomous outcomes for individual trials and pooled data in a meta-analysis. Non-Cochrane reviews were more likely to conclude that there was a beneficial effect of treatment. Cochrane reviews were of higher quality than non-Cochrane reviews. |
| 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? | No |