Critical appraisal:Cole BF, Logan RF, Halabi S, Benamouzig R, Sandler RS, Grainge MJ, et al 2009

Risk of bias assessment: systematic review

Studies included in the review

Was an adequate search strategy used?

Very thorough – included appropriate search terms and databases

Were the inclusion criteria appropriate and applied in an unbiased way?

Yes – pre-specified inclusion criteria applied independently by two people

Were the studies assessed for quality (relating to the minimisation of biases)?

No – quality assessment either not undertaken, inappropriate or not described

Were the characteristics and results of individual studies appropriately summarised?

Adequate – more information would be desirable

The following questions are only relevant for systematic reviews that pooled data

Were the methods used for pooling the data appropriate?

Yes

If there was heterogeneity, were sources of heterogeneity explored?

Yes

Overall risk of bias

Low risk of bias

Additional comments: Please replace this text and include any additional comments in regards to your risk of bias rating

This appraisal has been completed.

Article

Cole BF, Logan RF, Halabi S, Benamouzig R, Sandler RS, Grainge MJ, et al. Aspirin for the chemoprevention of colorectal adenomas: meta-analysis of the randomized trials. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009 Feb 18;101(4):256-66 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19211452.

Assigned to

User:Albert.chetcuti

Topic area

Guidelines:Colorectal cancer

Clinical question

• PPR1: What is the risk-benefit ratio for use of aspirin for prevention of colorectal cancer stratified by risk of colorectal cancer itself? (What is the optimal dose and frequency of administration?)

Form

Form:Quality appraisal sr

Section below only relevant for Cancer Council Project Officer

Edit appraisal assignment