Risk of Bias and Quality of Reporting in Colon and Rectal Cancer Systematic Reviews Cited by National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines

Ref ID 72
First Author C. Wayant
Journal JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE
Year Of Publishing 2020
URL https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31950401/
Keywords Protocols
Oncology
Pre-specification
Problem(s) No registered or published protocol
Lack of prespecification in eligibility criteria
High risk of bias (ROBIS)
Number of systematic reviews included 63
Summary of Findings Using ROBIS, only 3 (4.8%) of the included 63 systematic reviews were judged with low risk of bias, 35 (55.6%) systematic reviews were judged with unclear risk of bias, and 25 (39.7%) systematic reviews were judged with high risk of bias. Across all systematic reviews, the individual bias domains at the highest risk of bias were domains 1 (protocol and eligibility criteria) and 2 (methods to identify and select studies). Across all studies, the median adherence to PRISMA was 74.1% (IQR 69.2–80.0%), corresponding to approximately 20 of 27 items.
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