- Framework of problems / Transparent
- Multiplicity of outcomes and lack of pre-specification for outcome reporting
- Outcomes in Cochrane systematic reviews related to wound care: An investigation into prespecification
Ref ID | 92 |
First Author | Z. Liu |
Journal | WOUND REPAIR & REGENERATION |
Year Of Publishing | 2017 |
URL | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/wrr.12519?download=true |
Keywords |
Cochrane Multiplicity Pre-specification Nursing |
Problem(s) |
Multiplicity of outcomes and lack of pre-specification for outcome reporting |
Number of systematic reviews included | 106 |
Summary of Findings | 106 protocols were included for systematic reviews with 126 outcome domains. Outcomes were frequently poorly prespecified. Method of aggregation was the most poorly specified element (76–100% unclear), and when specified, it was usually a “percentage/proportion.” Time points and metric were very poorly specified, except for the domain of wound healing. Primary outcomes tended to be more completely specified than secondary outcomes. |
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 |