Instruments assessing risk of bias of randomized trials frequently included items that are not addressing risk of bias issues
Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved..
OBJECTIVES: To establish whether items included in instruments published in the last decade assessing risk of bias of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are indeed addressing risk of bias.
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus from 2010 to October 2021 for instruments assessing risk of bias of RCTs. By extracting items and summarizing their essential content, we generated an item list. Items that two reviewers agreed clearly did not address risk of bias were excluded. We included the remaining items in a survey in which 13 experts judged the issue each item is addressing: risk of bias, applicability, random error, reporting quality, or none of the above.
RESULTS: Seventeen eligible instruments included 127 unique items. After excluding 61 items deemed as clearly not addressing risk of bias, the item classification survey included 66 items, of which the majority of respondents deemed 20 items (30.3%) as addressing risk of bias; the majority deemed 11 (16.7%) as not addressing risk of bias; and there proved substantial disagreement for 35 (53.0%) items.
CONCLUSION: Existing risk of bias instruments frequently include items that do not address risk of bias. For many items, experts disagree on whether or not they are addressing risk of bias.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2022 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2022 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:152 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Journal of clinical epidemiology - 152(2022) vom: 29. Dez., Seite 218-225 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Wang, Ying [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Instrument |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 24.01.2023 Date Revised 01.02.2023 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.10.018 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM349377456 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM349377456 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231226042459.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.10.018 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1164.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM349377456 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)36424692 | ||
| 035 | |a (PII)S0895-4356(22)00268-2 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Wang, Ying |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Instruments assessing risk of bias of randomized trials frequently included items that are not addressing risk of bias issues |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2022 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 24.01.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 01.02.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. | ||
| 520 | |a OBJECTIVES: To establish whether items included in instruments published in the last decade assessing risk of bias of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are indeed addressing risk of bias | ||
| 520 | |a STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus from 2010 to October 2021 for instruments assessing risk of bias of RCTs. By extracting items and summarizing their essential content, we generated an item list. Items that two reviewers agreed clearly did not address risk of bias were excluded. We included the remaining items in a survey in which 13 experts judged the issue each item is addressing: risk of bias, applicability, random error, reporting quality, or none of the above | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: Seventeen eligible instruments included 127 unique items. After excluding 61 items deemed as clearly not addressing risk of bias, the item classification survey included 66 items, of which the majority of respondents deemed 20 items (30.3%) as addressing risk of bias; the majority deemed 11 (16.7%) as not addressing risk of bias; and there proved substantial disagreement for 35 (53.0%) items | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: Existing risk of bias instruments frequently include items that do not address risk of bias. For many items, experts disagree on whether or not they are addressing risk of bias | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Instrument | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Methodological quality | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Randomized controlled trials | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Risk of bias | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Systematic reviews | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Systematic survey | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ghadimi, Maryam |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Wang, Qi |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Hou, Liangying |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Zeraatkar, Dena |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Iqbal, Atiya |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ho, Cameron |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Yao, Liang |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Hu, Malini |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ye, Zhikang |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Couban, Rachel |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Armijo-Olivo, Susan |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Bassler, Dirk |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Briel, Matthias |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gluud, Lise Lotte |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Glasziou, Paul |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Jackson, Rod |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Keitz, Sheri A |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Letelier, Luz M |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ravaud, Philippe |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Schulz, Kenneth F |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Siemieniuk, Reed A C |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Brignardello-Petersen, Romina |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Guyatt, Gordon H |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of clinical epidemiology |d 1991 |g 152(2022) vom: 29. Dez., Seite 218-225 |w (DE-627)NLM012614815 |x 1878-5921 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:152 |g year:2022 |g day:29 |g month:12 |g pages:218-225 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.10.018 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 152 |j 2022 |b 29 |c 12 |h 218-225 | ||