Critical appraisal:Lee TJ, Rees CJ, Nickerson C, Stebbing J, Abercrombie JF, McNally RJ, et al 2013

From Cancer Guidelines Wiki

Risk of bias assessment: cohort study (risk factors)

Bias in selection of participants into study
Selection of the exposed and non-exposed cohorts
Drawn from the same population (low risk)
Bias due to error in exposure measurement
Measurement of exposure
Objective measurements from pre-existing records or <img alt="File:Jutta's info icon.png" src="/australiawiki_test/images/d/d9/Jutta%27s_info_icon.png" width="16" height="16"> baseline (Existing at or before baseline, where baseline is the time at which a participant is recorded to have entered the cohort or, if obtained after baseline, before onset of symptoms of the outcome or any likely effect of the developing outcome on the exposure) physical or biological assessment blind to outcome status (low risk)
Bias due to error in outcome measurement
Measurement of outcome
Outcome measurement unlikely to be influenced by exposure (low risk)
Was outcome of interest absent at the time to which the exposure refers?
Yes (low risk)
Was follow-up long enough for outcome to occur as a consequence of measured exposure? (Requires prior specification of a sufficient follow-up period)
Yes (low risk)
Bias due to non-participation
Participation rate in cohort
Participation rate in exposed cohort ≤10 percentage points different from non-exposed cohort OR exposed and non-exposed are from the same cohort (low risk)
Bias due to missing data
Completeness of follow-up of cohort
Active or passive follow-up with methods for ascertainment of one or more of outcome, death or emigration not described OR there was probably < 70% follow-up OR insufficient information to tell (high risk)
Accuracy of dates of outcome or censoring
Dates of outcome or censoring ascertained to within one year (low risk)
Difference in follow-up between exposed and non-exposed members of cohort
Follow-up methods are the same and likely to achieve the same completeness of follow-up in exposed and non-exposed participants (low risk)
Difference in missing data for exposure between those with or without the outcome
Difference in missing data for exposure ≥20 percentage points OR insufficient information to tell (high risk)
Bias due to confounding
Comparability of exposed and non-exposed cohorts with respect to potentially important confounding variables (Requires prior specification of potentially important confounders)
Age and other potentially important confounders measured and controlled by design or in analysis (low risk)
Analysis bias
Covariates are appropriately included in statistical analysis models
Variables measuring the same underlying concept or lying in the same causal pathway ARE NOT included together as covariates in statistical analysis models (low risk)


Overall risk of bias
High risk of bias Additional comments: Reporting bias:12 month surveillance could not be extracted as it was also unclear as to how many patients in total underwent 12 month surveillance. Reporting was also difficult to follow.


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


Article
Lee TJ, Rees CJ, Nickerson C, Stebbing J, Abercrombie JF, McNally RJ, et al. Management of complex colonic polyps in the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. Br J Surg 2013 Nov;100(12):1633-9 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24264787.
Assigned to
User:Victoria.freeman
Topic area
Guidelines:Colorectal cancer/Colonoscopy surveillance
Clinical question
Form
Form:Quality appraisal cohort risk factors
Outcomes
surveillance

Section below only relevant for Cancer Council Project Officer

Edit appraisal assignment