TY - JOUR
T1 - Some Cochrane risk of bias items are not important in osteoarthritis trials
T2 - A meta-epidemiological study based on Cochrane reviews
AU - Bolvig, Julie
AU - Juhl, Carsten B
AU - Boutron, Isabelle
AU - Tugwell, Peter
AU - Ghogomu, Elizabeth A T
AU - Pardo, Jordi Pardo
AU - Rader, Tamara
AU - Wells, George A
AU - Mayhew, Alain
AU - Maxwell, Lara
AU - Lund, Hans
AU - Bliddal, Henning
AU - Christensen, Robin
AU - Editorial Board of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group
N1 - Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2017/12/5
Y1 - 2017/12/5
N2 - OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of bias-related study characteristics on treatment effects in osteoarthritis (OA) trials.STUDY DESIGN: Based on OA trials included in Cochrane reviews the impact of study characteristics on treatment effect estimates were evaluated. Characteristics included items of the risk of bias tool (RoB), trial size, single vs multi-site, and source of funding. Effect sizes were calculated as standardized mean differences (SMDs). Meta-regression was performed to identify "relevant study-level covariates" that decreases the between-study variance (τˆ2).RESULTS: Twenty reviews including 126 OA trials with a high degree of heterogeneity was included (τˆ2=0.1247). Among RoB domains only patient blinding had an impact on the results (reducing heterogeneity according to τˆ2 <7%). Inadequate blinding of patients yielded larger effects (SMDDifference = 0.15; 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.29, P=0.035). The most important study characteristic was trial size (heterogeneity reduced by 25%), with small trials reporting larger effects (SMDDifference = 0.29; 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.42, P<0.001).CONCLUSION: In musculoskeletal reviews addressing pain, all the items included in the Cochrane risk of bias tool might not be equally important. OA trial results may be affected by bias constructs that are not yet fully elucidated.
AB - OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of bias-related study characteristics on treatment effects in osteoarthritis (OA) trials.STUDY DESIGN: Based on OA trials included in Cochrane reviews the impact of study characteristics on treatment effect estimates were evaluated. Characteristics included items of the risk of bias tool (RoB), trial size, single vs multi-site, and source of funding. Effect sizes were calculated as standardized mean differences (SMDs). Meta-regression was performed to identify "relevant study-level covariates" that decreases the between-study variance (τˆ2).RESULTS: Twenty reviews including 126 OA trials with a high degree of heterogeneity was included (τˆ2=0.1247). Among RoB domains only patient blinding had an impact on the results (reducing heterogeneity according to τˆ2 <7%). Inadequate blinding of patients yielded larger effects (SMDDifference = 0.15; 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.29, P=0.035). The most important study characteristic was trial size (heterogeneity reduced by 25%), with small trials reporting larger effects (SMDDifference = 0.29; 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.42, P<0.001).CONCLUSION: In musculoskeletal reviews addressing pain, all the items included in the Cochrane risk of bias tool might not be equally important. OA trial results may be affected by bias constructs that are not yet fully elucidated.
KW - Journal Article
KW - Review
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85042466616
U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.11.026
DO - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.11.026
M3 - Review
C2 - 29222059
SN - 0895-4356
JO - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
JF - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
ER -