Critical appraisal:Faries MB, Thompson JF, Cochran AJ, Andtbacka RH, Mozzillo N, Zager JS, et al 2017 2

From Cancer Guidelines Wiki

Risk of bias assessment: randomised controlled trial

Was the trial double-blinded?
Outcomes not blinded, substantial side-effects, or not reported.
Was the treatment allocation schedule concealed?
No concealment or unclear (e.g. no approach described, open randomisation lists, person doing recruitment tossing a coin).
Were all randomised participants included in the analysis?
Exclusions not likely to cause bias (>80% follow-up for all groups, <5% difference in follow-up between groups)
The field below is not considered when calculating the risk of bias rating
How was the allocation schedule generated?
Adequate (e.g. random number table, computer random generator, coin tossing, card shuffling)
Overall risk of bias
High risk of bias Additional comments: Please replace this text and include any additional comments in regards to your risk of bias rating

Jutta's tick icon.png This appraisal has been completed.

Faries MB, Thompson JF, Cochran AJ, Andtbacka RH, Mozzillo N, Zager JS, et al. Completion Dissection or Observation for Sentinel-Node Metastasis in Melanoma. N Engl J Med 2017 Jun 8;376(23):2211-2222 Available from:
Assigned to
Topic area
Clinical question
Form:Quality appraisal rct

Section below only relevant for Cancer Council Project Officer

Edit appraisal assignment