| Ref ID | 820 |
| First Author | T.T. Vo |
| Journal | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY |
| Year Of Publishing | 2022 |
| URL | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435621004169?casa_token=WQzh4b8n_L0AAAAA:ddJ8nV-nfdH6D56amzMt9YTw1DdBr_hYqZ1ZZke71DcSywq9tYYeXXuXj1siFdvyuN3wEKfoS3c#sec0002 |
| Keywords |
• Risk of bias • General medical • Statistical |
| Problem(s) |
• No quality assessment undertaken or reported • Limited quality assessment or no risk of bias |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | United States |
| Aim | To assess the risk of bias assessment practice in 103 systematic reviews of mediation studies indexed in MEDLINE (OvidSP), PsycINFO (OvidSP), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (OvidSP), and PubMed databases from 2007 to 2020. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | From 103 systematic reviews of mediation studies indexed in across four databases from 2007 to 2020, 24 (23%) reviews did not assess the risk of bias of eligible studies, and 48 (47%) assessed risk of bias using a tool that was not specifically designed to evaluate mediation analysis. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 103 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 1824 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |