- Framework of problems / Transparent
- Failure to address missing outcome data in analyses
- Can a core outcome set improve the quality of systematic reviews?–a survey of the Co-ordinating Editors of Cochrane Review Groups
|J. J. Kirkham
|Year Of Publishing
Failure to address missing outcome data in analyses
Failure to define clinically meaningful outcomes
|Number of systematic reviews included
|Summary of Findings
|In one fifth (n=26 (18%)) of the published 283 reviews in the total sample, more than 50% of the patient data for the primary outcome was missing. Responses to the survey were received from 90% of Co-ordinating Editors. Thirty-six percent of Cochrane Review Group's have a centralized policy regarding which outcomes to include in the Summary of Findings table and 73% of Co-ordinating Editors thought that a Core Outcome Set for effectiveness trials should be used routinely for a Summary of Findings table.
|Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results?
|Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study?