Critical appraisal:Cole BF, Logan RF, Halabi S, Benamouzig R, Sandler RS, Grainge MJ, et al 2009
From Cancer Guidelines Wiki
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
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|
- 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
- Topic area
- Guidelines:Colorectal cancer
- Clinical question
Section below only relevant for Cancer Council Project Officer