Neu

Assessment ID: 4ac6af55-f833-4947-a4e4-94a20b076857

Assessment Metadata

Phase 1 disabled

This assessment can proceed with Phase 2 and Phase 3 without Phase 1 completion.

Phase 2: Identifying concerns with the review process

Y=YES, PY=PROBABLY YES, PN=PROBABLY NO, N=NO, NI=NO INFORMATION

DOMAIN 1: STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Describe the study eligibility criteria, any restrictions on eligibility and whether there was evidence that objectives and eligibility criteria were pre-specified:

1.1 Did the review adhere to pre-defined objectives and eligibility criteria?

Notes for this question (optional)

1.2 Were the eligibility criteria appropriate for the review question?

Notes for this question (optional)

1.3 Were eligibility criteria unambiguous?

Notes for this question (optional)

1.4 Were any restrictions in eligibility criteria based on study characteristics appropriate (e.g. date, sample size, study quality, outcomes measured)?

Notes for this question (optional)

1.5 Were any restrictions in eligibility criteria based on sources of information appropriate (e.g. publication status or format, language, availability of data)?

Notes for this question (optional)

Concerns regarding specification of study eligibility criteria

Rationale for concern:

DOMAIN 2: IDENTIFICATION AND SELECTION OF STUDIES

Describe methods of study identification and selection (e.g. number of reviewers involved):

2.1 Did the search include an appropriate range of databases/electronic sources for published and unpublished reports?

Notes for this question (optional)

2.2 Were methods additional to database searching used to identify relevant reports?

Notes for this question (optional)

2.3 Were the terms and structure of the search strategy likely to retrieve as many eligible studies as possible?

Notes for this question (optional)

2.4 Were restrictions based on date, publication format, or language appropriate?

Notes for this question (optional)

2.5 Were efforts made to minimise error in selection of studies?

Notes for this question (optional)

Concerns regarding methods used to identify and/or select studies

Rationale for concern:

DOMAIN 3: DATA COLLECTION AND STUDY APPRAISAL

Describe methods of data collection, what data were extracted from studies or collected through other means, how risk of bias was assessed (e.g. number of reviewers involved) and the tool used to assess risk of bias:

3.1 Were efforts made to minimise error in data collection?

Notes for this question (optional)

3.2 Were sufficient study characteristics available for both review authors and readers to be able to interpret the results?

Notes for this question (optional)

3.3 Were all relevant study results collected for use in the synthesis?

Notes for this question (optional)

3.4 Was risk of bias (or methodological quality) formally assessed using appropriate criteria?

Notes for this question (optional)

3.5 Were efforts made to minimise error in risk of bias assessment?

Notes for this question (optional)

Concerns regarding methods used to collect data and appraise studies

Rationale for concern:

DOMAIN 4: SYNTHESIS AND FINDINGS

Describe synthesis methods:

4.1 Did the synthesis include all studies that it should?

Notes for this question (optional)

4.2 Were all pre-defined analyses reported or departures explained?

Notes for this question (optional)

4.3 Was the synthesis appropriate given the nature and similarity in the research questions, study designs and outcomes across included studies?

Notes for this question (optional)

4.4 Was between-study variation (heterogeneity) minimal or addressed in the synthesis?

Notes for this question (optional)

4.5 Were the findings robust, e.g. as demonstrated through funnel plot or sensitivity analyses?

Notes for this question (optional)

4.6 Were biases in primary studies minimal or addressed in the synthesis?

Notes for this question (optional)

Concerns regarding the synthesis and findings

Rationale for concern:

Phase 3: Judging risk of bias

Phase 2 is not yet visibly started in all four domains. You can still save a Phase 3 draft, but it should only be treated as final once all four Phase 2 domains are present.

Summarize the concerns identified during the Phase 2 assessment:

Domain	Concern	Rationale for concern
1. Concerns regarding specification of study eligibility criteria	Low	poz
2. Concerns regarding methods used to identify and/or select studies	Low	juztr
3. Concerns regarding methods used to collect data and appraise studies	Unclear	jhgfd
4. Concerns regarding the synthesis and findings

RISK OF BIAS IN THE REVIEW

Describe whether conclusions were supported by the evidence:

A. Did the interpretation of findings address all of the concerns identified in Domains 1 to 4?

Notes for this question (optional)

B. Was the relevance of identified studies to the review's research question appropriately considered?

Notes for this question (optional)

C. Did the reviewers avoid emphasizing results on the basis of their statistical significance?

Notes for this question (optional)

Risk of bias in the review

Rationale for risk:

Export

JSON export | CSV export | Print-friendly export

Neu

Assessment Metadata

Phase 1 disabled

Phase 2: Identifying concerns with the review process

DOMAIN 1: STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

DOMAIN 2: IDENTIFICATION AND SELECTION OF STUDIES

DOMAIN 3: DATA COLLECTION AND STUDY APPRAISAL

DOMAIN 4: SYNTHESIS AND FINDINGS

Phase 3: Judging risk of bias

RISK OF BIAS IN THE REVIEW

Export

Danger zone