The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 18 October 2011
- Vol. 343 (oct18 2), d5928
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d5928
Abstract
Flaws in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of randomised trials can cause the effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more accurateThis publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- Risk of bias versus quality assessment of randomised controlled trials: cross sectional studyBMJ, 2009
- Therapeutic drug monitoring of antiretrovirals for people with HIVEmergencias, 2009
- GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendationsBMJ, 2008
- Recommendations by Cochrane Review Groups for assessment of the risk of bias in studiesBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2008
- Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological studyBMJ, 2008
- Bias in Clinical Intervention ResearchAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 2006
- Controlling the risk of spurious findings from meta‐regressionStatistics in Medicine, 2004
- Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trialsBMJ, 2001
- The Hazards of Scoring the Quality of Clinical Trials for Meta-analysisJAMA, 1999
- Low-molecular-weight heparin versus standard heparin in general and orthopaedic surgery: a meta-analysisThe Lancet, 1992