Title |
Effect of standardized training on the reliability of the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool: a study protocol
|
---|---|
Published in |
Systematic Reviews, December 2014
|
DOI | 10.1186/2046-4053-3-144 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Bruno R da Costa, Nina M Resta, Brooke Beckett, Nicholas Israel-Stahre, Alison Diaz, Bradley C Johnston, Matthias Egger, Peter Jüni, Susan Armijo-Olivo |
Abstract |
The Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool has been widely embraced by the systematic review community, but several studies have reported that its reliability is low. We aim to investigate whether training of raters, including objective and standardized instructions on how to assess risk of bias, can improve the reliability of this tool. We describe the methods that will be used in this investigation and present an intensive standardized training package for risk of bias assessment that could be used by contributors to the Cochrane Collaboration and other reviewers. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Canada | 1 | 33% |
Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Netherlands | 1 | 4% |
Unknown | 26 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Bachelor | 5 | 19% |
Student > Master | 5 | 19% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 11% |
Professor | 2 | 7% |
Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
Other | 1 | 4% |
Unknown | 9 | 33% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 37% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 7% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 4% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
Other | 2 | 7% |
Unknown | 10 | 37% |