Cargando…
Most Cochrane systematic reviews and protocols did not adhere to the Cochrane's risk of bias 2.0 tool
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify the frequency of Cochrane systematic reviews and Cochrane systematic reviews protocols using (or planning to use) the risk of bias 2.0 tool to assess the risk of bias of the included randomized clinical trials. STUDY DESIGN: This is a meta-research st...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Associação Médica Brasileira
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10004297/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36820779 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.20221593 |
_version_ | 1784904798270652416 |
---|---|
author | Martimbianco, Ana Luiza Cabrera Sá, Kamilla Mayr Martins Santos, Giovanna Marcílio Santos, Elaine Marcílio Pacheco, Rafael Leite Riera, Rachel |
author_facet | Martimbianco, Ana Luiza Cabrera Sá, Kamilla Mayr Martins Santos, Giovanna Marcílio Santos, Elaine Marcílio Pacheco, Rafael Leite Riera, Rachel |
author_sort | Martimbianco, Ana Luiza Cabrera |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify the frequency of Cochrane systematic reviews and Cochrane systematic reviews protocols using (or planning to use) the risk of bias 2.0 tool to assess the risk of bias of the included randomized clinical trials. STUDY DESIGN: This is a meta-research study. METHODS: We included Cochrane systematic reviews or Cochrane systematic reviews protocols that planned to include randomized clinical trials. We assessed the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and screened for issues published after the launch of risk of bias 2.0 tool (2019–2022). Two independent investigators performed the study selection and data extraction. RESULTS: We analyzed 440 Cochrane systematic reviews and 536 Cochrane systematic reviews protocols. Overall, 4.8% of the Cochrane systematic reviews and 28.5% of the Cochrane systematic reviews protocols used or planned to use risk of bias 2.0 tool. Although low, adherence is increasing over time. In 2019, 0% of Cochrane systematic reviews used risk of bias 2.0 tool, compared to 24.1% in 2022. In Cochrane systematic reviews protocols, adherence increased from 6.9% in 2019 to 41.5% in 2022. A total of 274 (62.1%) Cochrane systematic reviews had their protocols published before 2018; only one used risk of bias 2.0 tool and reported the change of versions in the “Differences between protocol and revision” section. CONCLUSION: The Cochrane's risk of bias 2.0 tool has low adherence among Cochrane protocols and systematic reviews. Further efforts are necessary to facilitate the implementation of this new tool. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10004297 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Associação Médica Brasileira |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-100042972023-03-11 Most Cochrane systematic reviews and protocols did not adhere to the Cochrane's risk of bias 2.0 tool Martimbianco, Ana Luiza Cabrera Sá, Kamilla Mayr Martins Santos, Giovanna Marcílio Santos, Elaine Marcílio Pacheco, Rafael Leite Riera, Rachel Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992) Original Article OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify the frequency of Cochrane systematic reviews and Cochrane systematic reviews protocols using (or planning to use) the risk of bias 2.0 tool to assess the risk of bias of the included randomized clinical trials. STUDY DESIGN: This is a meta-research study. METHODS: We included Cochrane systematic reviews or Cochrane systematic reviews protocols that planned to include randomized clinical trials. We assessed the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and screened for issues published after the launch of risk of bias 2.0 tool (2019–2022). Two independent investigators performed the study selection and data extraction. RESULTS: We analyzed 440 Cochrane systematic reviews and 536 Cochrane systematic reviews protocols. Overall, 4.8% of the Cochrane systematic reviews and 28.5% of the Cochrane systematic reviews protocols used or planned to use risk of bias 2.0 tool. Although low, adherence is increasing over time. In 2019, 0% of Cochrane systematic reviews used risk of bias 2.0 tool, compared to 24.1% in 2022. In Cochrane systematic reviews protocols, adherence increased from 6.9% in 2019 to 41.5% in 2022. A total of 274 (62.1%) Cochrane systematic reviews had their protocols published before 2018; only one used risk of bias 2.0 tool and reported the change of versions in the “Differences between protocol and revision” section. CONCLUSION: The Cochrane's risk of bias 2.0 tool has low adherence among Cochrane protocols and systematic reviews. Further efforts are necessary to facilitate the implementation of this new tool. Associação Médica Brasileira 2023-02-20 /pmc/articles/PMC10004297/ /pubmed/36820779 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.20221593 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Martimbianco, Ana Luiza Cabrera Sá, Kamilla Mayr Martins Santos, Giovanna Marcílio Santos, Elaine Marcílio Pacheco, Rafael Leite Riera, Rachel Most Cochrane systematic reviews and protocols did not adhere to the Cochrane's risk of bias 2.0 tool |
title | Most Cochrane systematic reviews and protocols did not adhere to the Cochrane's risk of bias 2.0 tool |
title_full | Most Cochrane systematic reviews and protocols did not adhere to the Cochrane's risk of bias 2.0 tool |
title_fullStr | Most Cochrane systematic reviews and protocols did not adhere to the Cochrane's risk of bias 2.0 tool |
title_full_unstemmed | Most Cochrane systematic reviews and protocols did not adhere to the Cochrane's risk of bias 2.0 tool |
title_short | Most Cochrane systematic reviews and protocols did not adhere to the Cochrane's risk of bias 2.0 tool |
title_sort | most cochrane systematic reviews and protocols did not adhere to the cochrane's risk of bias 2.0 tool |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10004297/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36820779 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.20221593 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT martimbiancoanaluizacabrera mostcochranesystematicreviewsandprotocolsdidnotadheretothecochranesriskofbias20tool AT sakamillamayrmartins mostcochranesystematicreviewsandprotocolsdidnotadheretothecochranesriskofbias20tool AT santosgiovannamarcilio mostcochranesystematicreviewsandprotocolsdidnotadheretothecochranesriskofbias20tool AT santoselainemarcilio mostcochranesystematicreviewsandprotocolsdidnotadheretothecochranesriskofbias20tool AT pachecorafaelleite mostcochranesystematicreviewsandprotocolsdidnotadheretothecochranesriskofbias20tool AT rierarachel mostcochranesystematicreviewsandprotocolsdidnotadheretothecochranesriskofbias20tool |