在大多数Cochrane评价中，选择性报告偏倚评估的风险不足。,Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

当前位置： X-MOL 学术 › J. Clin. Epidemiol. › 论文详情

Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)

在大多数Cochrane评价中，选择性报告偏倚评估的风险不足。
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology ( IF 7.3 ) Pub Date : 2019-04-19 , DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.04.007
Frano Saric ₁ , Ognjen Barcot ₂ , Livia Puljak ₃

Affiliation

目的本研究的目的是分析Cochrane系统评价中选择性报道的偏倚风险（RoB）判断的充分性。研究设计与设置我们使用计算机解析器提取了RoB评估，包括判断（低，高或不清楚的风险）和Cochrane随机对照试验评价的支持性意见。我们分析了支持评论中提到的信息来源。我们将Cochrane作者的判断与Cochrane系统干预评论手册（Cochrane手册）的指南进行了比较，并将其分类为适当或不适当。结果在分析的Cochrane评价中，至少60％的关于选择性报告偏倚试验风险的判断与《 Cochrane手册》不符。很少有Cochrane作者提到试验方案是评估选择性报告的数据来源。大多数不充分的判断是在被认为具有较低的选择性报告偏倚风险的试验中做出的。超过90％。在9％的分析RoB表中，Cochrane作者根本没有使用此RoB域。结论Cochrane作者经常对选择性报告做出RoB判断，这与《 Cochrane手册》不符，也没有提及试验方案。旨在帮助Cochrane作者在Cochrane评价中进行充分的RoB评估的干预措施将是有益的。结论Cochrane作者经常对选择性报告做出RoB判断，这与《 Cochrane手册》不符，也没有提及试验方案。旨在帮助Cochrane作者在Cochrane评价中进行充分的RoB评估的干预措施将是有益的。结论Cochrane作者经常对选择性报告做出RoB判断，这与《 Cochrane手册》不符，也没有提及试验方案。旨在帮助Cochrane作者在Cochrane评价中进行充分的RoB评估的干预措施将是有益的。

"点击查看英文标题和摘要"

Risk of bias assessments for selective reporting were inadequate in the majority of Cochrane reviews.

OBJECTIVES The aim of the study was to analyze adequacy of risk of bias (RoB) judgments for selective reporting in Cochrane systematic reviews. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING We extracted RoB assessments, including judgment (low, high, or unclear risk) and supporting comment from Cochrane reviews of randomized controlled trials using computer parser. We analyzed sources of information mentioned in supporting comments. We compared judgments of Cochrane authors with guidance from the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Cochrane Handbook) and categorized them into adequate or inadequate. RESULTS At least 60% of judgments for risk of selective reporting bias of trials in analyzed Cochrane reviews were not in line with the Cochrane Handbook. Few Cochrane authors mentioned the trial protocol as a source of data for assessing selective reporting. Most of the inadequate judgments were made among trials that were judged with low risk of selective reporting bias; more than 90%. In 9% of analyzed RoB tables, Cochrane authors did not use this RoB domain at all. CONCLUSION Cochrane authors frequently make RoB judgments about selective reporting that are not in line with Cochrane Handbook and not mentioning trial protocol. Interventions aimed at helping Cochrane authors to make adequate RoB assessments in Cochrane reviews would be beneficial.

更新日期：2019-11-01

点击分享查看原文

点击收藏

阅读更多本刊新发论文本刊介绍/投稿指南