Risk of bias judgements and strength of conclusions in meta-evidence from the Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group
Abstract Background The Cochrane Collaboration records risk of bias (ROB) judgements on the original studies it analyses. The aim of this review is to perform an audit of all literature produced by the Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group (CCCG), focusing on whether intervention type has any relationshi...
Main Authors: | John Delaney, Rebecca Cui, Alexander Engel |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2019-04-01
|
Series: | Systematic Reviews |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13643-019-1001-0 |
Similar Items
-
The judgement of biases included in the category “other bias” in Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions: a systematic survey
by: Andrija Babic, et al.
Published: (2019-04-01) -
Adequacy of risk of bias assessment in surgical vs non-surgical trials in Cochrane reviews: a methodological study
by: Ognjen Barcot, et al.
Published: (2020-09-01) -
Risk of bias judgments for random sequence generation in Cochrane systematic reviews were frequently not in line with Cochrane Handbook
by: Ognjen Barcot, et al.
Published: (2019-08-01) -
Assessing the risk of performance and detection bias in Cochrane reviews as a joint domain is less accurate compared to two separate domains
by: Ognjen Barcot, et al.
Published: (2021-07-01) -
Assessments of attrition bias in Cochrane systematic reviews are highly inconsistent and thus hindering trial comparability
by: Andrija Babic, et al.
Published: (2019-04-01)