- Framework of problems / Rigorous
- Flawed risk of bias undertaken
- Assessing risk of bias judgments for blinding of outcome assessors in Cochrane reviews
| Ref ID | 667 |
| First Author | O. Barcot |
| Journal | JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH |
| Year Of Publishing | 2020 |
| URL | https://dx.doi.org/10.2217/cer-2019-0181 |
| Keywords |
• General medical • Risk of bias • Author • Cochrane |
| Problem(s) |
• Flawed risk of bias undertaken |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 575 |
| Summary of Findings | More than a fifth of risk of bias assessments for blinding of outcome assessors were not in line with Cochrane Handbook. 70% of Cochrane authors specified in the RoB table that the judgment referred to ‘all outcomes’ and 12% did not specify to which outcomes the domain was referring to. 22% of RoB judgments for detection bias in analysed Cochrane reviews were inadequate because judgments were not supported by accompanying comments |
| Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? | N/A |
| Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | Yes |