Learn More
This article deals with inconsistency of relative, rather than absolute, treatment effects in binary/dichotomous outcomes. A body of evidence is not rated up in quality if studies yield consistent results, but may be rated down in quality if inconsistent. Criteria for evaluating consistency include similarity of point estimates, extent of overlap of(More)
Direct evidence comes from research that directly compares the interventions in which we are interested when applied to the populations in which we are interested and measures outcomes important to patients. Evidence can be indirect in one of four ways. First, patients may differ from those of interest (the term applicability is often used for this form of(More)
GRADE requires a clear specification of the relevant setting, population, intervention, and comparator. It also requires specification of all important outcomes - whether evidence from research studies is, or is not, available. For a particular management question, the population, intervention, and outcome should be sufficiently similar across studies so(More)
Presenting continuous outcomes in Summary of Findings tables presents particular challenges to interpretation. When each study uses the same outcome measure, and the units of that measure are intuitively interpretable (e.g., duration of hospitalization, duration of symptoms), presenting differences in means is usually desirable. When the natural units of(More)
Diamond Blackfan anaemia (DBA) is a rare, genetically and clinically heterogeneous, inherited red cell aplasia. Classical DBA affects about seven per million live births and presents during the first year of life. However, as mutated genes have been discovered in DBA, non-classical cases with less distinct phenotypes are being described in adults as well as(More)
Objectives (1) To assess endorsement of trial registration in author instructions of urology-related journals and (2) to assess whether randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the field of urology were effectively registered. Design Cross-sectional study of author instructions and published trials. Setting Journals publishing in the field of urology. (More)
OBJECTIVE To determine whether and how eligibility criteria of participants prespecified in protocols of randomised trials are reported in subsequent articles. DESIGN Cohort study. SETTING Protocols submitted to the ethics committee of a German medical faculty. DATA SOURCES 52 trial protocols and 78 subsequent publications published between 2000 and(More)
BACKGROUND The synthesis of published research in systematic reviews is essential when providing evidence to inform clinical and health policy decision-making. However, the validity of systematic reviews is threatened if journal publications represent a biased selection of all studies that have been conducted (dissemination bias). To investigate the extent(More)
BACKGROUND Many clinical studies are ultimately not fully published in peer-reviewed journals. Underreporting of clinical research is wasteful and can result in biased estimates of treatment effect or harm, leading to recommendations that are inappropriate or even dangerous. METHODS We assembled a cohort of clinical studies approved 2000-2002 by the(More)
BACKGROUND Dissemination bias in clinical research severely impedes informed decision-making not only for healthcare professionals and patients, but also for funders, research ethics committees, regulatory bodies and other stakeholder groups that make health-related decisions. Decisions based on incomplete and biased evidence cannot only harm people, but(More)