• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Common tool structures and approaches to risk of bias assessment: implications for systematic reviewers

JC. Stone, J. Leonardi-Bee, TH. Barker, K. Sears, M. Klugar, Z. Munn, E. Aromataris

. 2024 ; 22 (3) : 389-393. [pub] 20240301

Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké

Typ dokumentu systematický přehled, časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc24006851

There are numerous tools available to assess the risk of bias in individual studies in a systematic review. These tools have different structures, including scales and checklists, which may or may not separate their items by domains. There are also various approaches and guides for the process, scoring, and interpretation of risk of bias assessments, such as value judgments, quality scores, and relative ranks. The objective of this commentary, which is part of the JBI Series on Risk of Bias, is to discuss some of the distinctions among different tool structures and approaches to risk of bias assessment and the implications of these approaches for systematic reviewers.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc24006851
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20240423155532.0
007      
ta
008      
240412s2024 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.11124/JBIES-23-00463 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)38385437
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Stone, Jennifer C $u JBI, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia $1 https://orcid.org/0000000237876175
245    10
$a Common tool structures and approaches to risk of bias assessment: implications for systematic reviewers / $c JC. Stone, J. Leonardi-Bee, TH. Barker, K. Sears, M. Klugar, Z. Munn, E. Aromataris
520    9_
$a There are numerous tools available to assess the risk of bias in individual studies in a systematic review. These tools have different structures, including scales and checklists, which may or may not separate their items by domains. There are also various approaches and guides for the process, scoring, and interpretation of risk of bias assessments, such as value judgments, quality scores, and relative ranks. The objective of this commentary, which is part of the JBI Series on Risk of Bias, is to discuss some of the distinctions among different tool structures and approaches to risk of bias assessment and the implications of these approaches for systematic reviewers.
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    12
$a výzkumný projekt $7 D012107
650    _2
$a zkreslení výsledků (epidemiologie) $7 D015982
650    12
$a kontrolní seznam $7 D057189
655    _2
$a systematický přehled $7 D000078182
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Leonardi-Bee, Jo $u Centre for Evidence Based Healthcare, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
700    1_
$a Barker, Timothy H $u JBI, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia $u Health Evidence Synthesis, Recommendations and Impact (HESRI), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia
700    1_
$a Sears, Kim $u JBI, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia $u Queen's Collaboration for Health Care Quality, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada
700    1_
$a Klugar, Miloslav $u Institute of Health Information and Statistics of the Czech Republic, Prague, Czech Republic $u The Czech Republic, A JBI Centre of Excellence, Prague, Czech Republic $u Center of Evidence-based Education & Arts Therapies: A JBI Affiliated Group, Faculty of Education, Palacký University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic $u Cochrane Czech Republic, Prague, Czech Republic $u Czech GRADE Centre, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Munn, Zachary $u JBI, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia $u Health Evidence Synthesis, Recommendations and Impact (HESRI), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia
700    1_
$a Aromataris, Edoardo $u JBI, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia
773    0_
$w MED00207800 $t JBI evidence synthesis $x 2689-8381 $g Roč. 22, č. 3 (2024), s. 389-393
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38385437 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20240412 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20240423155529 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2081057 $s 1216618
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2024 $b 22 $c 3 $d 389-393 $e 20240301 $i 2689-8381 $m JBI evidence synthesis $n JBI Evid Synth $x MED00207800
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20240412

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Možnosti archivace