These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
301 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32562833)
1. The revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) showed low interrater reliability and challenges in its application. Minozzi S; Cinquini M; Gianola S; Gonzalez-Lorenzo M; Banzi R J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 Oct; 126():37-44. PubMed ID: 32562833 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of interventions showed low inter-rater reliability and challenges in its application. Minozzi S; Cinquini M; Gianola S; Castellini G; Gerardi C; Banzi R J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Aug; 112():28-35. PubMed ID: 30981833 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Reliability of the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB2) improved with the use of implementation instruction. Minozzi S; Dwan K; Borrelli F; Filippini G J Clin Epidemiol; 2022 Jan; 141():99-105. PubMed ID: 34537386 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Methodologically rigorous risk of bias tools for nonrandomized studies had low reliability and high evaluator burden. Jeyaraman MM; Rabbani R; Copstein L; Robson RC; Al-Yousif N; Pollock M; Xia J; Balijepalli C; Hofer K; Mansour S; Fazeli MS; Ansari MT; Tricco AC; Abou-Setta AM J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 Dec; 128():140-147. PubMed ID: 32987166 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Risk of bias judgments for random sequence generation in Cochrane systematic reviews were frequently not in line with Cochrane Handbook. Barcot O; Boric M; Poklepovic Pericic T; Cavar M; Dosenovic S; Vuka I; Puljak L BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Aug; 19(1):170. PubMed ID: 31382898 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Disagreements in risk of bias assessment for randomized controlled trials in hypertension-related Cochrane reviews. Yao Y; Shen J; Luo J; Li N; Liao X; Zhang Y Trials; 2024 Jun; 25(1):405. PubMed ID: 38907276 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Poor reliability between Cochrane reviewers and blinded external reviewers when applying the Cochrane risk of bias tool in physical therapy trials. Armijo-Olivo S; Ospina M; da Costa BR; Egger M; Saltaji H; Fuentes J; Ha C; Cummings GG PLoS One; 2014; 9(5):e96920. PubMed ID: 24824199 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Adequacy of risk of bias assessment in surgical vs non-surgical trials in Cochrane reviews: a methodological study. Barcot O; Boric M; Dosenovic S; Cavar M; Jelicic Kadic A; Poklepovic Pericic T; Vukicevic I; Vuka I; Puljak L BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 Sep; 20(1):240. PubMed ID: 32993499 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Reliability of 3 assessment tools used to evaluate randomized controlled trials for treatment of neck pain. Graham N; Haines T; Goldsmith CH; Gross A; Burnie S; Shahzad U; Talovikova E Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2012 Mar; 37(6):515-22. PubMed ID: 21673624 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Testing the risk of bias tool showed low reliability between individual reviewers and across consensus assessments of reviewer pairs. Hartling L; Hamm MP; Milne A; Vandermeer B; Santaguida PL; Ansari M; Tsertsvadze A; Hempel S; Shekelle P; Dryden DM J Clin Epidemiol; 2013 Sep; 66(9):973-81. PubMed ID: 22981249 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The judgement of biases included in the category "other bias" in Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions: a systematic survey. Babic A; Pijuk A; Brázdilová L; Georgieva Y; Raposo Pereira MA; Poklepovic Pericic T; Puljak L BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Apr; 19(1):77. PubMed ID: 30971219 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews of Non-Randomized Studies of Adverse Cardiovascular Effects of Thiazolidinediones and Cyclooxygenase-2 Inhibitors: Application of a New Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Bilandzic A; Fitzpatrick T; Rosella L; Henry D PLoS Med; 2016 Apr; 13(4):e1001987. PubMed ID: 27046153 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Frequency of use and adequacy of Cochrane risk of bias tool 2 in non-Cochrane systematic reviews published in 2020: Meta-research study. Babić A; Barcot O; Visković T; Šarić F; Kirkovski A; Barun I; Križanac Z; Ananda RA; Fuentes Barreiro YV; Malih N; Dimcea DA; Ordulj J; Weerasekara I; Spezia M; Žuljević MF; Šuto J; Tancredi L; Pijuk A; Sammali S; Iascone V; von Groote T; Poklepović Peričić T; Puljak L Res Synth Methods; 2024 May; 15(3):430-440. PubMed ID: 38262609 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Inter-rater reliability and validity of risk of bias instrument for non-randomized studies of exposures: a study protocol. Jeyaraman MM; Al-Yousif N; Robson RC; Copstein L; Balijepalli C; Hofer K; Fazeli MS; Ansari MT; Tricco AC; Rabbani R; Abou-Setta AM Syst Rev; 2020 Feb; 9(1):32. PubMed ID: 32051035 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A psychometric study found AMSTAR 2 to be a valid and moderately reliable appraisal tool. Lorenz RC; Matthias K; Pieper D; Wegewitz U; Morche J; Nocon M; Rissling O; Schirm J; Jacobs A J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Oct; 114():133-140. PubMed ID: 31152864 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Inter-Rater Agreement in Assessing Risk of Bias in Melanoma Prediction Studies Using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST): Results from a Controlled Experiment on the Effect of Specific Rater Training. Kaiser I; Pfahlberg AB; Mathes S; Uter W; Diehl K; Steeb T; Heppt MV; Gefeller O J Clin Med; 2023 Mar; 12(5):. PubMed ID: 36902763 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Usability and sensitivity of the risk of bias assessment tool for randomized controlled trials of pharmacist interventions. Tonin FS; Lopes LA; Rotta I; Bonetti AF; Pontarolo R; Correr CJ; Fernandez-Llimos F Int J Clin Pharm; 2019 Jun; 41(3):785-792. PubMed ID: 30963446 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]