Clinical trials in COVID-19 management & prevention: A meta-epidemiological study examining methodological quality
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
No abstract available
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.11.29.20237875: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding The modified Cochrane RoB tool rates methodological quality of each included study as low, probably low, probably high, or high RoB across each of five domains, reflecting bias: (1) from the randomization process, (2) due to deviations from the intended intervention (which included blinding procedures), (3) due to missing data, (4) due to measurement of the outcome, and (5) in selection of the reported results. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Risk of Bias Assessment: Three reviewers evaluated RoB of included studies using … SciScore for 10.1101/2020.11.29.20237875: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding The modified Cochrane RoB tool rates methodological quality of each included study as low, probably low, probably high, or high RoB across each of five domains, reflecting bias: (1) from the randomization process, (2) due to deviations from the intended intervention (which included blinding procedures), (3) due to missing data, (4) due to measurement of the outcome, and (5) in selection of the reported results. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Risk of Bias Assessment: Three reviewers evaluated RoB of included studies using the modified version of the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool independently (Supplementary Material Online 2). Cochrane RoBsuggested: (Robot Reviewer, RRID:SCR_018961)We used Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 26.0 (IBM Corporation) for all descriptive and regression analyses and Stata/IC 16.1 (StataCorp LLC) to produce the forest plot of effect sizes. Statistical Package for the Social Sciencessuggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)SPSSsuggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)StataCorpsuggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:This study has several limitations. First, we did not include non-English trials which may influence the association between trial characteristics and trial outcomes. Furthermore, the relatively small sample of RCTs precluded our ability to conduct pre-planned subgroup analyses to evaluate the impact of trial characteristics on trial outcomes among trials that were preprints compared to those published in peer-reviewed journals. As such, updates on this report as more trials are published will allow for evaluation of a broader range of trial design characteristics and subgroup analyses to further understand the association between trial characteristics and trial outcomes.
Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-
