Assessing risk of bias in studies that evaluate health care interventions: recommendations in the misinformation age

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 97, Issue , 2018, Pages 133-136

  Page, Matthew J ^a   Boutron, Isabelle ^b,c,d,e   Hansen, Camilla ^f   Altman, Douglas G ^g   Hróbjartsson, Asbjørn ^f  

^a MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b PARIS DESCARTES UNIVERSITY   (France)

^c UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DESCARTES   (France)

^d HÔTEL DIEU   (France)

^e Cochrane ^*  (France)

^f UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

^g UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Bias; Methodology; Nonrandomized studies; Quality; Randomized trials; Systematic reviews

Indexed keywords

CONFLICT OF INTEREST; HEALTH CARE; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; NOTE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); STATISTICAL BIAS;

BIAS;

EID: 85041903598     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.01.004     Document Type: Note

References (19)

1. Page, M.J., Higgins, J.P., Clayton, G., Sterne, J.A., Hróbjartsson, A., Savović, J., Empirical evidence of study design biases in randomized trials: systematic review of meta-epidemiological studies. PLoS One, 11, 2016, e0159267.
2. Savovic, J., Turner, R.M., Mawdsley, D., Jones, H.E., Beynon, R., Higgins, J.P.T., et al. Association between risk-of-bias assessments and results of randomized trials in cochrane reviews: the ROBES meta-epidemiologic study. Am J Epidemiol, 2017 [Epub ahead of print].
3. Ioannidis, J.P.A., Stuart, M.E., Brownlee, S., Strite, S.A., How to survive the medical misinformation mess. Eur J Clin Invest 47 (2017), 795–802.
4. Chiu, K., Grundy, Q., Bero, L., 'spin’ in published biomedical literature: a methodological systematic review. Plos Biol, 15(9), 2017, e2002173.
5. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D.G., Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med, 6(7), 2009, e1000097.
6. AHRQ Publication No. 10(14)-EHC063-EF Methods guide for effectiveness and comparative effectiveness reviews, 2014, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD Chapters Available at www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov.
7. Higgins, J.P.T., Altman, D.G., Sterne, J.A.C., Chapter 8: assessing risk of bias in included studies. Higgins, J.P.T., Green, S., (eds.) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, 2011, The Cochrane Collaboration Available at http://handbook.cochrane.org/ Version 5.1.0 Accessed March, 2011.
8. IOM (Institute of Medicine). Finding what works in health care: standards for systematic reviews. 2011, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
9. Turner, L., Boutron, I., Hróbjartsson, A., Altman, D.G., Moher, D., The evolution of assessing bias in Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions: celebrating methodological contributions of the Cochrane Collaboration. Syst Rev, 2, 2013, 79.
10. Viswanathan, M., Patnode, C.D., Berkman, N.D., Bass, E.B., Chang, S., Hartling, L., et al. Recommendations for assessing the risk of bias in systematic reviews of health care interventions. J Clin Epidemiol 97 (2018), 26–34.
11. Viswanathan, M., Ansari, M.T., Berkman, N.D., Chang, S., Hartling, L., McPheeters, L.M., et al. Assessing the risk of bias of individual studies in systematic reviews of health care interventions. Methods Guide for Comparative Effectiveness Reviews. AHRQ Publication No. 12-EHC047-EF, 2012, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD Available at www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/.
12. Sterne, J.A.C., Hernan, M.A., Reeves, B.C., Savović, J., Berkman, N.D., Viswanathan, M., et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ, 355, 2016, i4919.
13. Higgins, J.P.T., Sterne, J.A.C., Savović, J., Page, M.J., Hróbjartsson, A., Boutron, I., et al. A revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials. Cochrane Methods. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10:Suppl 1 (2016), 29–31.
14. Higgins, J.P.T., Altman, D.G., Gøtzsche, P.C., Jüni, P., Moher, D., Oxman, A.D., et al. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ, 343, 2011, d5928.
15. Jorgensen, L., Paludan-Muller, A.S., Laursen, D.R., Savović, J., Boutron, I., Sterne, J.A., et al. Evaluation of the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized clinical trials: overview of published comments and analysis of user practice in Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews. Syst Rev, 5(1), 2016, 80.
16. Rhodes, K.M., Turner, R.M., Savovic, J., Jones, H.E., Mawdsley, D., Higgins, J.P.T., Between-trial heterogeneity in meta-analyses may be partially explained by reported design characteristics. J Clin Epidemiol 95 (2018), 45–54.
17. Lundh, A., Lexchin, J., Mintzes, B., Schroll, J.B., Bero, L., Industry sponsorship and research outcome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2, 2017 MR000033.
18. Chan, A.W., Song, F., Vickers, A., Jefferson, T., Dickersin, K., Gøtzsche, P.C., et al. Increasing value and reducing waste: addressing inaccessible research. Lancet 383 (2014), 257–266.
19. Page, M.J., Higgins, J.P., Rethinking the assessment of risk of bias due to selective reporting: a cross-sectional study. Syst Rev, 5(1), 2016, 108.