Cargando…

Considerations from the risk of bias perspective for updating Cochrane reviews

Authors of Cochrane reviews are expected to update their reviews every 2 years. The updating process helps to ensure that reviews are current and include recent evidence. However, the updating process is time-consuming for authors, particularly when Cochrane methods evolve and authors are required t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mayhew, Alain D., Kabir, Monisha, Ansari, Mohammed T.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4596509/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26445323
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-015-0122-3
_version_ 1782393782483812352
author Mayhew, Alain D.
Kabir, Monisha
Ansari, Mohammed T.
author_facet Mayhew, Alain D.
Kabir, Monisha
Ansari, Mohammed T.
author_sort Mayhew, Alain D.
collection PubMed
description Authors of Cochrane reviews are expected to update their reviews every 2 years. The updating process helps to ensure that reviews are current and include recent evidence. However, the updating process is time-consuming for authors, particularly when Cochrane methods evolve and authors are required to revisit some of the originally included studies. The Cochrane Collaboration's ‘Risk of bias’ tool is a mandatory component of Cochrane reviews, providing an assessment of the potential biases of included studies. The tool has been modified most recently in 2011, and the expectation is that new versions will continue to be produced and utilised in all Cochrane reviews. In this commentary we discuss, in the context of updating scenarios that are likely to be encountered, the potential options systematic review authors may have recourse to when the Cochrane Collaboration's ‘Risk of bias’ tool has been modified between the original review and its update. We recommend that authors who are updating reviews should revise their original assessments of included studies using the most recent version of the risk of bias tool. Despite the increased workload, use of the most recent version of the tool facilitates consistency of methods and reporting both across and within reviews, and ensures currency to the methodological rigour.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4596509
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45965092015-10-08 Considerations from the risk of bias perspective for updating Cochrane reviews Mayhew, Alain D. Kabir, Monisha Ansari, Mohammed T. Syst Rev Commentary Authors of Cochrane reviews are expected to update their reviews every 2 years. The updating process helps to ensure that reviews are current and include recent evidence. However, the updating process is time-consuming for authors, particularly when Cochrane methods evolve and authors are required to revisit some of the originally included studies. The Cochrane Collaboration's ‘Risk of bias’ tool is a mandatory component of Cochrane reviews, providing an assessment of the potential biases of included studies. The tool has been modified most recently in 2011, and the expectation is that new versions will continue to be produced and utilised in all Cochrane reviews. In this commentary we discuss, in the context of updating scenarios that are likely to be encountered, the potential options systematic review authors may have recourse to when the Cochrane Collaboration's ‘Risk of bias’ tool has been modified between the original review and its update. We recommend that authors who are updating reviews should revise their original assessments of included studies using the most recent version of the risk of bias tool. Despite the increased workload, use of the most recent version of the tool facilitates consistency of methods and reporting both across and within reviews, and ensures currency to the methodological rigour. BioMed Central 2015-10-06 /pmc/articles/PMC4596509/ /pubmed/26445323 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-015-0122-3 Text en © Mayhew et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Commentary
Mayhew, Alain D.
Kabir, Monisha
Ansari, Mohammed T.
Considerations from the risk of bias perspective for updating Cochrane reviews
title Considerations from the risk of bias perspective for updating Cochrane reviews
title_full Considerations from the risk of bias perspective for updating Cochrane reviews
title_fullStr Considerations from the risk of bias perspective for updating Cochrane reviews
title_full_unstemmed Considerations from the risk of bias perspective for updating Cochrane reviews
title_short Considerations from the risk of bias perspective for updating Cochrane reviews
title_sort considerations from the risk of bias perspective for updating cochrane reviews
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4596509/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26445323
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-015-0122-3
work_keys_str_mv AT mayhewalaind considerationsfromtheriskofbiasperspectiveforupdatingcochranereviews
AT kabirmonisha considerationsfromtheriskofbiasperspectiveforupdatingcochranereviews
AT ansarimohammedt considerationsfromtheriskofbiasperspectiveforupdatingcochranereviews