Browsing by Author "Briel, Matthias"

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A methodological survey of the analysis, reporting and interpretation of Absolute Risk ReductiOn in systematic revieWs (ARROW): a study protocol
    (2013) Alonso-Coello, Pablo; Carrasco-Labra, Alonso; Brignardello-Petersen, Romina; Neumann Burotto, Gonzalo Ignacio; Akl, Elie A; Sun, Xin; Johnston, Bradley C; Briel, Matthias; Busse, Jason W; Glujovsky, Demián; Granados, Carlos E; Iorio, Alfonso; Irfan, Affan; García, Laura M; Mustafa, Reem A; Ramirez-Morera, Anggie; Solà, Iván; Tikkinen, Kari A O; Ebrahim, Shanil; Vandvik, Per O; Zhang, Yuqing; Selva, Anna; Sanabria, Andrea J; Zazueta, Oscar E; Vernooij, Robin W M; Schünemann, Holger J; Guyatt, Gordon H
    Abstract Background Clinicians, providers and guideline panels use absolute effects to weigh the advantages and downsides of treatment alternatives. Relative measures have the potential to mislead readers. However, little is known about the reporting of absolute measures in systematic reviews. The objectives of our study are to determine the proportion of systematic reviews that report absolute measures of effect for the most important outcomes, and ascertain how they are analyzed, reported and interpreted. Methods/design We will conduct a methodological survey of systematic reviews published in 2010. We will conduct a 1:1 stratified random sampling of Cochrane vs. non-Cochrane systematic reviews. We will calculate the proportion of systematic reviews reporting at least one absolute estimate of effect for the most patient-important outcome for the comparison of interest. We will conduct multivariable logistic regression analyses with the reporting of an absolute estimate of effect as the dependent variable and pre-specified study characteristics as the independent variables. For systematic reviews reporting an absolute estimate of effect, we will document the methods used for the analysis, reporting and interpretation of the absolute estimate. Discussion Our methodological survey will inform current practices regarding reporting of absolute estimates in systematic reviews. Our findings may influence recommendations on reporting, conduct and interpretation of absolute estimates. Our results are likely to be of interest to systematic review authors, funding agencies, clinicians, guideline developers and journal editors.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Completion and publication rates of randomized controlled trials in surgery an empirical study
    (2015) Rosenthal, Rachel; Kasenda, Benjamin; Dell-Kuster, Salome; Von Elm, Erik; You, John; Neumann Burotto, Gonzalo Ignacio; Tomonaga, Yuki; Saccilotto, Ramon; Amstutz, Alain; Bengough, Theresa; Meerpohl, Joerg J.; Stegert, Mihaela; Tikkinen, Kari A. O.; Blümle, Anette; Carrasco-Labra, Alonso; Faulhaber, Markus; Mulla, Sohail; Mertz, Dominik; Akl, Elie A.; Bassler, Dirk; Busse, Jason W.; Ferreira-González, Ignacio; Lamontagne, Francois; Nordmann, Alain; Gloy, Viktoria; Olu, Kelechi K.; Raatz, Heike; Moja, Lorenzo; Ebrahim, Shanil; Schandelmaier, Stefan; Sun, Xin; Vandvik, Per O.; Johnston, Bradley C.; Walter, Martin A.; Burnand, Bernard; Schwenkglenks, Matthias; Hemkens, Lars G.; Bucher, Heiner C.; Guyatt, Gordon H.; Briel, Matthias
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Potential impact on estimated treatment effects of information lost to follow-up in randomised controlled trials (LOST-IT): systematic review
    (BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2012) Akl, Elie A.; Briel, Matthias; You, John J.; Sun, Xin; Johnston, Bradley C.; Busse, Jason W.; Mulla, Sohail; Lamontagne, Francois; Bassler, Dirk; Vera, Claudio; Alshurafa, Mohamad; Katsios, Christina M.; Zhou, Qi; Cukierman Yaffe, Tali; Gangji, Azim; Mills, Edward J.; Walter, Stephen D.; Cook, Deborah J.; Schuenemann, Holger J.; Altman, Douglas G.; Guyatt, Gordon H.
    Objective To assess the reporting, extent, and handling of loss to follow-up and its potential impact on the estimates of the effect of treatment in randomised controlled trials.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Reporting handling and assessing the risk of bias associated with missing participant data in systematic reviews : a methodological survey
    (2015) Akl, Elie A.; Carrasco Labra, Alonso; Brignardello Petersen, Romina; Neumann Burotto, Gonzalo Ignacio; Johnston, Bradley C.; Sun, Xin; Briel, Matthias; Busse, Jason W; Ebrahim, Shanil; Granados, Carlos; Iorio, Alfonso; Irfan, Affan; Martínez García, Laura; Mustafa, Reem A.; Ramírez Morera, Anggie; Selva, Anna; Solà, Ivan; Sanabria, Andrea Juliana; Tikkinen, Kari A. O.; Vandvik, Per O.; Vernooij, Robin W. M.; Zazueta, Oscar E.; Zhou, Qi; Guyatt, Gordon H.; Alonso Coello, Pablo
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Specific instructions for estimating unclearly reported blinding status in randomized trials were reliable and valid
    (ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC, 2012) Akl, Elie A.; Sun, Xin; Busse, Jason W.; Johnston, Bradley C.; Briel, Matthias; Mulla, Sohail; You, John J.; Bassler, Dirk; Lamontagne, Francois; Vera, Claudio; Alshurafa, Mohamad; Katsios, Christina M.; Heels Ansdell, Diane; Zhou, Qi; Mills, Ed; Guyatt, Gordon H.
    Objective: To test the reliability and validity of specific instructions to classify blinding, when unclearly reported in randomized trials, as "probably done" or "probably not done."