Pretraga

Pretražite po imenu i prezimenu autora, mentora, urednika, prevoditelja

Napredna pretraga

Pregled bibliografske jedinice broj: 1070321

Cochrane risk of bias tool was used inadequately in the majority of non-Cochrane systematic reviews

Puljak, Livia; Ramic, Irma; Arriola Naharro, Coral; Brezova, Jana; Lin, Yi-Chen; Surdila, Andrada-Alexandra; Tomajkova, Ester; Farias Medeiros, Inês; Nikolovska, Mishela; Poklepovic Pericic, Tina et al.
Cochrane risk of bias tool was used inadequately in the majority of non-Cochrane systematic reviews // Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 123 (2020), 114-119 doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.03.019 (međunarodna recenzija, članak, znanstveni)

CROSBI ID: 1070321 Za ispravke kontaktirajte CROSBI podršku putem web obrasca

Naslov
Cochrane risk of bias tool was used inadequately in the majority of non-Cochrane systematic reviews

Autori
Puljak, Livia ; Ramic, Irma ; Arriola Naharro, Coral ; Brezova, Jana ; Lin, Yi-Chen ; Surdila, Andrada-Alexandra ; Tomajkova, Ester ; Farias Medeiros, Inês ; Nikolovska, Mishela ; Poklepovic Pericic, Tina ; Barcot, Ognjen ; Suarez Salvado, Maria

Izvornik
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (0895-4356) 123 (2020); 114-119

Vrsta, podvrsta i kategorija rada
Radovi u časopisima, članak, znanstveni

Ključne riječi
Cochrane ; Methodology ; Quality assessment ; Quality improvement ; Risk of bias ; Systematic reviews

Sažetak
Objectives: To analyze how many non-Cochrane systematic reviews (NCSRs) used Cochrane's risk of bias (RoB) tool, domains they used, and whether judgments and comments about RoB were in line with Cochrane Handbook. Methods: This was a methodological (research- on-research) study. We retrieved NCSRs from PubMed, extracted information about methods used for RoB assessment, and if they used 2011 Cochrane RoB tool, we analyzed their RoB methods and compared them with Cochrane Handbook guidance. Results: We included 508 NCSRs ; 431 (85%) reported they analyzed RoB, and 269 (53%) used Cochrane RoB tool. Only 16 of those 269 (5.9%) reported both a judgment and a supporting comment in the Cochrane RoB table in the manuscript (N = 4) or in a supplementary file (N = 12). Fifteen reviews, with 158 included trials, used judgments low/high/unclear ; 41% of analyzed available judgments were inadequate, either because judgment was not in line with comment or comment was missing. Conclusions: Most NCSRs use Cochrane RoB tool to assess RoB, but most of them reported it incompletely, with high prevalence of inadequate judgments. Authors, editors, and peer-reviewers should make an effort to improve completeness and adequacy of Cochrane RoB assessment in non-Cochrane reviews.

Izvorni jezik
Engleski

Znanstvena područja
Javno zdravstvo i zdravstvena zaštita



POVEZANOST RADA

Ustanove:
KBC Split,
Medicinski fakultet, Split,
Hrvatsko katoličko sveučilište, Zagreb

Profili:

Avatar Url Ognjen Barčot (autor)

Avatar Url Tina Poklepović Peričić (autor)

Avatar Url Livia Puljak (autor)

Poveznice na cjeloviti tekst rada:

doi

Citiraj ovu publikaciju:

Puljak, Livia; Ramic, Irma; Arriola Naharro, Coral; Brezova, Jana; Lin, Yi-Chen; Surdila, Andrada-Alexandra; Tomajkova, Ester; Farias Medeiros, Inês; Nikolovska, Mishela; Poklepovic Pericic, Tina et al.
Cochrane risk of bias tool was used inadequately in the majority of non-Cochrane systematic reviews // Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 123 (2020), 114-119 doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.03.019 (međunarodna recenzija, članak, znanstveni)
Puljak, L., Ramic, I., Arriola Naharro, C., Brezova, J., Lin, Y., Surdila, A., Tomajkova, E., Farias Medeiros, I., Nikolovska, M. & Poklepovic Pericic, T. (2020) Cochrane risk of bias tool was used inadequately in the majority of non-Cochrane systematic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 123, 114-119 doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.03.019.
@article{article, author = {Puljak, Livia and Ramic, Irma and Arriola Naharro, Coral and Brezova, Jana and Lin, Yi-Chen and Surdila, Andrada-Alexandra and Tomajkova, Ester and Farias Medeiros, In\^{e}s and Nikolovska, Mishela and Poklepovic Pericic, Tina and Barcot, Ognjen and Suarez Salvado, Maria}, year = {2020}, pages = {114-119}, DOI = {10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.03.019}, keywords = {Cochrane, Methodology, Quality assessment, Quality improvement, Risk of bias, Systematic reviews}, journal = {Journal of Clinical Epidemiology}, doi = {10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.03.019}, volume = {123}, issn = {0895-4356}, title = {Cochrane risk of bias tool was used inadequately in the majority of non-Cochrane systematic reviews}, keyword = {Cochrane, Methodology, Quality assessment, Quality improvement, Risk of bias, Systematic reviews} }
@article{article, author = {Puljak, Livia and Ramic, Irma and Arriola Naharro, Coral and Brezova, Jana and Lin, Yi-Chen and Surdila, Andrada-Alexandra and Tomajkova, Ester and Farias Medeiros, In\^{e}s and Nikolovska, Mishela and Poklepovic Pericic, Tina and Barcot, Ognjen and Suarez Salvado, Maria}, year = {2020}, pages = {114-119}, DOI = {10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.03.019}, keywords = {Cochrane, Methodology, Quality assessment, Quality improvement, Risk of bias, Systematic reviews}, journal = {Journal of Clinical Epidemiology}, doi = {10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.03.019}, volume = {123}, issn = {0895-4356}, title = {Cochrane risk of bias tool was used inadequately in the majority of non-Cochrane systematic reviews}, keyword = {Cochrane, Methodology, Quality assessment, Quality improvement, Risk of bias, Systematic reviews} }

Časopis indeksira:


  • Current Contents Connect (CCC)
  • Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC)
    • Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXP)
    • SCI-EXP, SSCI i/ili A&HCI
  • Scopus
  • MEDLINE

Citati:

    Altmetrijski pokazatelji:


    Podijeli:





    Contrast
    Increase Font
    Decrease Font
    Dyslexic Font
    CROSBI koristi kolačiće (cookies) kako bi poboljšao funkcionalnost stranice.