Outcome Reporting Bias Bmj. Hutton and Williamson first defined outcome reporting bias sometimes termed selective reporting bias in 2000. Tools for assessing risk of bias due to selective non-reporting guide users to assess a study or an outcome within a study as high risk of bias if no results are reported for an outcome.
Artificial Intelligence Versus Clinicians Systematic Review Of Design Reporting Standards And Claims Of In 2020 Deep Learning Digital Health Artificial Intelligence from www.pinterest.com
This has potential to overestimate treatment effects and underestimate harms. This selective non-reporting of outcomes in clinical studies can lead to bias when outcome results are selected based on knowledge of the results and has been shown to affect the conclusions of a substantial proportion of Cochrane systematic reviews. Design Cohort study of systematic reviews from two databases.
However assessing the corresponding risk of bias in a synthesis that is missing the non-reported outcomes is outside the scope of most of these tools.
However assessing the corresponding risk of bias in a synthesis that is missing the non-reported outcomes is outside the scope of most of these tools. However assessing the corresponding risk of bias in a synthesis that is missing the non-reported outcomes is outside the scope of most of these tools. The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews articleKirkham2010TheIO titleThe impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews authorJ. This has potential to overestimate treatment effects and underestimate harms.
