KnowledgeTrend Research Network
KnowledgeTrend JournalFunding & Careers
KnowledgeTrend
☰ Menu
HomePapersResearchersResearch LabsProjectsGroupsFunding & CareersScholarshipsBlogJournalTools
Sign inCreate account
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews, Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life, Delphi Technique in Research

RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

BMJ · 2019

JJonathan A C Sterne·JJelena Savović·MMatthew J. Page·RRoy G. Elbers·NNatalie Blencowe·IIsabelle Boutron·CChristopher J Cates·HHung‐Yuan Cheng·MMark Corbett·SSandra Eldridge·JJonathan Emberson·MMiguel A. Hernán·SSally Hopewell·AAsbjørn Hróbjartsson·DDaniela R. Junqueira·PPeter Jüni·JJamie J Kirkham·TToby J Lasserson·TTianjing Li·AAlexandra McAleenan·BBarnaby C Reeves·SSasha Shepperd·IIan Shrier·LLesley Stewart·KKate Tilling·IIan R. White·PPenny Whiting·JJulian P. T. Higgins
0 KT citations43 views0 saves0 references

Abstract

Assessment of risk of bias is regarded as an essential component of a systematic review on the effects of an intervention. The most commonly used tool for randomised trials is the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. We updated the tool to respond to developments in understanding how bias arises in randomised trials, and to address user feedback on and limitations of the original tool.

Research topics

Delphi Technique in ResearchHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Full text

Read the research paper

PDF provided by the publishing journal.

View PDFDownload PDF
Continue discovering

Related research

PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews.

The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.