Blaaskatheterisatie Module 2 Risk-of-bias-tabel
Risk of bias table for intervention studies (randomized controlled trials; based on Cochrane risk of bias tool and suggestions by the CLARITY Group at McMaster University)
|
Study reference (first author, publication year) |
Was the allocation sequence adequately generated? Definitely yes Probably yes Probably no Definitely no |
Was the allocation adequately concealed? Definitely yes Probably yes Probably no Definitely no |
Blinding: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented? Were patients blinded? Were healthcare providers blinded? Were data collectors blinded? Were outcome assessors blinded? Were data analysts blinded? Definitely yes Probably yes Probably no Definitely no |
Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent? Definitely yes Probably yes Probably no Definitely no |
Are reports of the study free of selective outcome reporting? Definitely yes Probably yes Probably no Definitely no |
Was the study apparently free of other problems that could put it at a risk of bias? Definitely yes Probably yes Probably no Definitely no |
Overall risk of bias If applicable/necessary, per outcome measure LOW Some concerns HIGH
|
|
Khahakaew, 2021 |
Probably no Reason: Not reported and some departments only wanted to use saline |
Probably no Reason: Some departments only wanted to use Saline |
Probably yes Reason:
|
Probably yes Reason: there is a difference between both groups in % incomplete data but this difference is small |
Definitely yes Reason: All relevant outcomes were reported |
Definitely yes Reason: No other problems noted |
Some concerns Reason: Allocation sequence |