- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- Data extraction errors and double counting
- Increased risks for random errors are common in outcomes graded as high certainty of evidence
Ref ID | 682 |
First Author | G. Gartlehner |
Journal | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY |
Year Of Publishing | 2019 |
URL | https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.10.009 |
Keywords |
Cochrane Author Error General medical Outcomes |
Problem(s) |
Following guidelines is no guarantee of a rigorous systematic review Errors in effect estimate calculations or data synthesis Data extraction errors and double counting |
Number of systematic reviews included | 100 |
Summary of Findings | Over one-third (38%) of outcomes rated as high certainty of evidence based on GRADE had increased risks for type I or type II errors. Analysis of predictive factors increased risk of errors indicated that in the majority of cases investigators responsible for rating certainty of evidence did not adhere to current guidance, particularly around imprecision. |
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 |