Standard 2: Containing risk of bias

Pediatrics

Volumn 129, Issue SUPPL. 3, 2012, Pages

  Hartling, Lisa ^a   Hamm, Michele ^a   Klassen, Terry ^b,c   Chan, An Wen ^d   Meremikwu, Martin ^e   Moyer, Virginia ^f   Scott, Shannon ^g   Moher, David ^d   Offringa, Martin ^h  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^b MANITOBA INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH   (Canada)

^c Department of Pediatrics and Child Health ^*  (Canada)

^d OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALABAR   (Nigeria)

^f TEXAS CHILDREN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^h HOSPITAL FOR SICK CHILDREN RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

Author keywords

Bias; Blinding; Outcome reporting; Pediatric; Randomization; StaR child health

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); CONFERENCE PAPER; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FOLLOW UP; FUNDING; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; METHODOLOGY; PEDIATRICS; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; QUANTITATIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZATION; REGISTRATION; STANDARD; SYSTEMATIC ERROR;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CHILD; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; HUMANS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; RESEARCH REPORT; RISK; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84861892763     PISSN: 00314005     EISSN: 10984275     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2012-0055E     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (65)

1. Knapp JF, Simon SD, Sharma V. Quality of care for common pediatric respiratory illnesses in United States emergency departments: analysis of 2005 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey Data. Pediatrics. 2008;122(6):1165-1170
2. Hampers LC. Practice variation with febrile infants: delight in disorder? Pediatrics. 2009;124(2):783-785
3. Johnson DW, Craig W, Brant R, Mitton C, Svenson L, Klassen TP. A cluster randomized controlled trial comparing three methods of disseminating practice guidelines for children with croup [ISRCTN73394937]. [ISRCTN73394937] Implement Sci. 2006;1:10
4. Freedman SB, Gouin S, Bhatt M, et al; Pediatric Emergency Research Canada. Prospective assessment of practice pattern variations in the treatment of pediatric gastroenteritis. Pediatrics. 2011;127(2). Available at: www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/full/127/2/e287
5. Grol R, Grimshaw J. From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients' care. Lancet. 2003;362 (9391):1225-1230
6. Thomson D, Hartling L, Cohen E, Vandermeer B, Tjosvold L, Klassen TP. Controlled trials in children: quantity, methodological quality and descriptive characteristics of pediatric controlled trials published 1948-2006. PLoS ONE. 2010;5(9)
7. Hartling L, Ospina M, Liang Y, et al. Risk of bias versus quality assessment of randomised controlled trials: cross sectional study. BMJ. 2009;339:b4012
8. Hamm MP, Hartling L, Milne A, et al. A descriptive analysis of a representative sample of pediatric randomized controlled trials published in 2007. BMC Pediatr. 2010; 10:96
9. Crocetti MT, Amin DD, Scherer R. Assessment of risk of bias among pediatric randomized controlled trials. Pediatrics. 2010; 126(2):298-305
10. Higgins JPT, Altman DG and Sterne JAC. Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available at: www.cochrane-handbook.org. Accessed April 28, 2012
11. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA. 1995;273(5):408-412
12. Moher D, Pham B, Jones A, et al. Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet. 1998;352(9128):609-613
13. Kjaergard LL, Villumsen J, Gluud C. Reported methodologic quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-analyses. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135 (11):982-989
14. Siersma V, Als-Nielsen B, Chen W, Hilden J, Gluud LL, Gluud C. Multivariable modelling for meta-epidemiological assessment of the association between trial quality and treatment effects estimated in randomized clinical trials. Stat Med. 2007;26(14):2745-2758
15. Als-Nielsen B, Gluud LL, Gluud C. Methodological quality and treatment effects in randomised trials: a review of six empirical studies. In: 12th Cochrane Colloquium; October 2-6, 2004; Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
16. Balk EM, Bonis PA, Moskowitz H, et al. Correlation of quality measures with estimates of treatment effect in meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. JAMA. 2002; 287(22):2973-2982
17. Egger M, Juni P, Bartlett C, Holenstein F, Sterne J. How important are comprehensive literature searches and the assessment of trial quality in systematic reviews? Empirical study. Health Technol Assess. 2003;7(1):1-76
18. Pildal J, Hróbjartsson A, Jørgensen KJ, Hilden J, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC. Impact of allocation concealment on conclusions drawn from meta-analyses of randomized trials. Int J Epidemiol. 2007;36(4):847-857
19. Wood L, Egger M, Gluud LL, et al. Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ. 2008;336(7644):601-605
20. Savovic J. The association of three bias domains with treatment effect estimates in randomised control trials: combined analysis of meta-epidemiological studies. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2008;102(suppl VI):29-30
21. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Altman DG. The landscape and lexicon of blinding in randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 2002; 136(3):254-259
22. Montori VM, Bhandari M, Devereaux PJ, Manns BJ, Ghali WA, Guyatt GH. In the dark: the reporting of blinding status in randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55(8):787-790
23. Sackett DL. Commentary: Measuring the success of blinding in RCTs: don't, must, can't or needn't? Int J Epidemiol. 2007;36 (3):664-665
24. Tierney JF, Stewart LA. Investigating patient exclusion bias in meta-analysis. Int J Epidemiol. 2005;34(1):79-87
25. Melander H, Ahlqvist-Rastad J, Meijer G, Beermann B. Evidence b(i)ased medicine-selective reporting from studies sponsored by pharmaceutical industry: review of studies in new drug applications. BMJ. 2003;326 (7400):1171-1173
26. Porta N, Bonet C, Cobo E. Discordance between reported intention-to-treat and per protocol analyses. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60 (7):663-669
27. Abraha I, Duca P, Montedori A. Empirical evidence of bias: modified intention to treat analysis of randomised trials affects estimates of intervention efficacy. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2008;102(suppl VI):9
28. Hutton JL, Williamson PR. Bias in metaanalysis due to outcome variable selection within studies. Appl Stat. 2000;49: 359-370
29. Nuesch E, Trelle S, Reichenbach S, Rutjes A, Scherrer M, Burgi E. Empirical evidence of attrition bias in meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2000;102(suppl VI):9
30. Dwan K, Altman DG, Arnaiz JA, et al. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PLoS ONE. 2008;3(8):e3081
31. Hahn S, Williamson PR, Hutton JL. Investigation of within-study selective reporting in clinical research: follow-up of applications submitted to a local research ethics committee. J Eval Clin Pract. 2002;8 (3):353-359
32. Chan AW, Krleza-Jerić K, Schmid I, Altman DG. Outcome reporting bias in randomized trials funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. CMAJ. 2004;171(7):735-740
33. Chan AW, Hróbjartsson A, Haahr MT, Gøtzsche PC, Altman DG. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA. 2004; 291(20):2457-2465
34. Chan AW, Altman DG. Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomised trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors. BMJ. 2005;330(7494):753
35. Von Elm E, Rollin A, Blumle A, Senessie C, Low N, Egger M. Selective reporting of outcomes of drug trials? Comparison of study protocols and published articles. In: XIV Cochrane Colloquium; October 23-26, 2006; Dublin, Ireland
36. Chan AW, Hróbjartsson A, Jørgensen KJ, Gøtzsche PC, Altman DG. Discrepancies in sample size calculations and data analyses reported in randomised trials: comparison of publications with protocols. BMJ. 2008; 337:a2299
37. Al-Marzouki S, Roberts I, Evans S, Marshall T. Selective reporting in clinical trials: analysis of trial protocols accepted by The Lancet. Lancet. 2008;372(9634):201
38. Furukawa TA, Watanabe N, Omori IM, Montori VM, Guyatt GH. Association between unreported outcomes and effect size estimates in Cochrane meta-analyses. JAMA. 2007;297 (5):468-470
39. Marshall M, Lockwood A, Bradley C, Adams C, Joy C, Fenton M. Unpublished rating scales: a major source of bias in randomised controlled trials of treatments for schizophrenia. Br J Psychiatry. 2000;176: 249-252
40. Vickers AJ. The use of percentage change from baseline as an outcome in a controlled trial is statistically inefficient: a simulation study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2001;1(6):6
41. Schulz KF. Subverting randomization in controlled trials. JAMA. 1995;274(18):1456-1458
42. Schulz KF, Grimes DA. Generation of allocation sequences in randomised trials: chance, not choice. Lancet. 2002;359(9305): 515-519
43. Juni P, Nuesch E, Reichenbach S, Rutjes A, Scherrer M, Burgi E. Overestimation of treatment effects associated with small sample size in osteoarthritis research. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2008;102 (suppl VI):62
44. Caldwell PH, Murphy SB, Butow PN, Craig JC. Clinical trials in children. Lancet. 2004; 364(9436):803-811
45. Campbell H, Surry SA, Royle EM. A review of randomised controlled trials published in Archives of Disease in Childhood from 1982-96. Arch Dis Child. 1998;79(2):192-197
46. Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, Clark O. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ. 2003;326(7400):1167-1170
47. Bekelman JE, Li Y, Gross CP. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review. JAMA. 2003;289(4):454-465
48. Sismondo S. Pharmaceutical company funding and its consequences: a qualitative systematic review. Contemp Clin Trials. 2008;29 (2):109-113
49. Friedman L, Furberg CD, DeMets D. Fundamentals of Clinical Trials. New York, New York: Springer Science+Business Media, LLC; 1998
50. DeAngelis CD, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA, et al; International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. JAMA. 2004;292(11):1363-1364
51. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Frequently asked questions about Clinical Trials Registration. Available at: www.icmje.org/faq- clinical.html. Accessed September 6, 2011
52. Equator Network. Reporting guidelines under development. Available at: www.equatronetwork. org/resource-centre/library-of-health-research-reporting/ reporting-guide lines-under-development/. Accessed September 6, 2011
53. Chan AW. Bias, spin, and misreporting: time for full access to trial protocols and results. PLoS Med. 2008;5(11):e230
54. SPIRIT Group. The SPIRIT Initiative: defining standard protocol items for randomized trials. Executive Summary (August 2010). Available at: www.equator-network.org/resource-centre/library-of-health-research-reporting/ reporting-guidelines-under-development/. Accessed September 6, 2011
55. Altman DG, Furberg CD, Grimshaw JM, Rothwell PM. Lead editorial: trials - using the opportunities of electronic publishing to improve the reporting of randomised trials. Trials. 2006;7:6
56. BioMed Central Blog. SPIRIT: New guidance or protocol authors. Available at: http:// blogs.openaccesscentral.com/blogs/bmcblog/entry/spirit-new-guidance- for-protocol. Published 2010. Accessed September 6, 2011
57. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, et al; Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Group. CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(8):e1-e37
58. CONSORT. Transparent reporting of trials. Available at: www.consort-statement.org. Accessed September 6, 2011
59. Turner L. The influence of CONSORT on the quality of RCTS: an updated review. In: Canadian Cochrane Symposium; February 16-17, 2011; Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
60. Klassen TP, Hartling L, Craig JC, Offringa M. Children are not just small adults: the urgent need for high-quality trial evidence in children. PLoS Med. 2008;5(8):e172
61. Cramer K, Wiebe N, Moyer V, et al. Children in reviews: methodological issues in child-relevant evidence syntheses. BMC Pediatr. 2005;5:38
62. Contopoulos-Ioannidis DG, Baltogianni MS, Ioannidis JP. Comparative effectiveness of medical interventions in adults versus children. J Pediatr. 2010;157(2):322-330
63. Rheims S, Cucherat M, Arzimanoglou A, Ryvlin P. Greater response to placebo in children than in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis in drug-resistant partial epilepsy. PLoS Med. 2008;5(8):e166
64. Fernandes R, Ferreira JJ, Sampaio C. The placebo response in studies of acute migraine. J Pediatr. 2008;152(4):527-533
65. Standards for Research in Child Health. Available at: www.ifsrc.org/index.php?option= com-content&view=article&id= 30&Itemid=2. Accessed April 28, 2012