亲爱的研友该休息了!由于当前在线用户较少,发布求助请尽量完整地填写文献信息,科研通机器人24小时在线,伴您度过漫漫科研夜!身体可是革命的本钱,早点休息,好梦!

Frequency of use and adequacy of Cochrane risk of bias tool 2 in non‐Cochrane systematic reviews published in 2020: Meta‐research study

系统回顾 荟萃分析 科克伦图书馆 科克伦合作 医学 梅德林 心理干预 随机对照试验 心理学 内科学 生物 护理部 生物化学
作者
Andrija Babić,Ognjen Barčot,Tomislav Visković,Frano Šarić,Aleksandar Kirkovski,Ivana Barun,Zvonimir Križanac,Roshan A. Ananda,Yuli V. Fuentes,Narges Malih,Daiana Anne‐Marie Dimcea,Josipa Ordulj,Ishanka Weerasekara,Matteo Spezia,Marija Franka Žuljević,Jelena Šuto,L. Tancredi,Anđela Pijuk,Susanna Sammali,Veronica Iascone
出处
期刊:Research Synthesis Methods [Wiley]
卷期号:15 (3): 430-440 被引量:10
标识
DOI:10.1002/jrsm.1695
摘要

Risk of bias (RoB) assessment is essential to the systematic review methodology. The new version of the Cochrane RoB tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) was published in 2019 to address limitations identified since the first version of the tool was published in 2008 and to increase the reliability of assessments. This study analyzed the frequency of usage of the RoB 2 and the adequacy of reporting the RoB 2 assessments in non-Cochrane reviews published in 2020. This meta-research study included non-Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions published in 2020. For the reviews that used the RoB 2 tool, we analyzed the reporting of the RoB 2 assessment. Among 3880 included reviews, the Cochrane RoB 1 tool was the most frequently used (N = 2228; 57.4%), followed by the Cochrane RoB 2 tool (N = 267; 6.9%). From 267 reviews that reported using the RoB 2 tool, 213 (79.8%) actually used it. In 26 (12.2%) reviews, erroneous statements were used to indicate the RoB 2 assessment. Only 20 (9.4%) reviews presented a complete RoB 2 assessment with a detailed table of answers to all signaling questions. The judgment of risk of bias by the RoB 2 tool was not justified by a comment in 158 (74.2%) reviews. Only in 33 (14.5%) of reviews the judgment in all domains was justified in the accompanying comment. In most reviews (81.7%), the RoB was inadequately assessed at the study level. In conclusion, the majority of non-Cochrane reviews published in 2020 still used the Cochrane RoB 1 tool. Many reviews used the RoB 2 tool inadequately. Further studies about the uptake and the use of the RoB 2 tool are needed.

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
1秒前
4秒前
illuminate发布了新的文献求助10
10秒前
我是最牛的完成签到,获得积分10
15秒前
20秒前
科研通AI6.2应助ddd采纳,获得10
24秒前
24秒前
25秒前
30秒前
比格大王发布了新的文献求助10
34秒前
37秒前
123发布了新的文献求助10
42秒前
充电宝应助犹豫的凝丝采纳,获得10
1分钟前
1分钟前
1分钟前
1分钟前
1分钟前
1分钟前
Hello应助cgjhgh采纳,获得10
1分钟前
123发布了新的文献求助10
1分钟前
Copyright应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
1分钟前
1分钟前
1分钟前
2分钟前
2分钟前
2分钟前
123发布了新的文献求助10
2分钟前
2分钟前
可爱慕卉完成签到,获得积分20
2分钟前
白华苍松完成签到,获得积分10
2分钟前
2分钟前
2分钟前
ddd发布了新的文献求助10
2分钟前
3分钟前
科研通AI6.4应助ddd采纳,获得10
3分钟前
Ava应助犹豫的凝丝采纳,获得10
3分钟前
3分钟前
章鱼完成签到,获得积分10
3分钟前
3分钟前
3分钟前
高分求助中
Principles of Economics, 11th Edition 10000
University Physics with Modern Physics, 16th edition 10000
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
Molecular Mechanisms of Photosynthesis, 4th Edition 1000
Organic Reactions, Volume 116 1000
Current concepts in cutaneous toxicity : proceedings of the Fourth Conference on Cutaneous Toxicity, Washington, D.C., May 9-11, 1979 1000
The recovery-stress questionnaires : user manual 800
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 纳米技术 工程类 有机化学 化学工程 生物化学 计算机科学 内科学 物理 复合材料 催化作用 细胞生物学 无机化学 光电子学 物理化学 电极 基因
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 7257526
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 8879447
关于积分的说明 18757098
捐赠科研通 6937915
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 3201074
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 2375192
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 2176937