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 Cochrane
Author
Risk of bias
General medical
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? Not Applicable
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? Yes