Why the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item

scientific article

Why the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item is …
instance of (P31):
editorialQ871232
scholarly articleQ13442814

External links are
P356DOI10.1002/14651858.ED000075
P8608Fatcat IDrelease_kgkozhyj3ja6nkr536xb3ct7ru
P3181OpenCitations bibliographic resource ID1759602
P698PubMed publication ID24575439

P50authorLisa BeroQ16192607
P2860cites workFactors associated with findings of published trials of drug-drug comparisons: why some statins appear more efficacious than othersQ21563421
Industry sponsorship and research outcomeQ24202591
The cycle of bias in health research: a framework and toolbox for critical appraisal trainingQ24289237
Association of funding and conclusions in randomized drug trials: a reflection of treatment effect or adverse events?Q26701411
Outcome reporting in industry-sponsored trials of gabapentin for off-label useQ28264491
Effect of reporting bias on meta-analyses of drug trials: reanalysis of meta-analysesQ34116483
Reporting of conflicts of interest from drug trials in Cochrane reviews: cross sectional studyQ34294990
Design and reporting modifications in industry-sponsored comparative psychopharmacology trialsQ34925731
Are selective COX 2 inhibitors superior to traditional non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs?Q42778090
P407language of work or nameEnglishQ1860
P921main subjectresearch fundingQ372353
biasQ742736
P577publication date2013-12-20
P1433published inCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsQ15750361
P1476titleWhy the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item

Reverse relations

cites work (P2860)
Q24186168Amphetamines for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents
Q38760549Antiplatelet pretreatment and outcomes in intravenous thrombolysis for stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Q34299192Assessing bias in osteoarthritis trials included in Cochrane reviews: protocol for a meta-epidemiological study
Q90280198Associations between industry involvement and study characteristics at the time of trial registration in biomedical research
Q26471696Buffered solutions versus isotonic saline for resuscitation in non-surgical critically ill adults and children
Q36887082Evaluation of the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized clinical trials: overview of published comments and analysis of user practice in Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews
Q36456218Evidence from Toxicology: The Most Essential Science for Prevention
Q36994018How credible are the study results? Evaluating and applying internal validity tools to literature-based assessments of environmental health hazards
Q34264322Interpreting trial results following use of different intention-to-treat approaches for preventing attrition bias: a meta-epidemiological study protocol.
Q24186383Interventions for rosacea
Q42317700Marketing trials, marketing tricks - how to spot them and how to stop them
Q22061981Methylphenidate for children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)
Q94348315Pharmacological interventions for people with borderline personality disorder
Q93131144Prevalence of common mental health disorders in adults who are high or costly users of healthcare services: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
Q33456912Quality assessment of observational studies in a drug-safety systematic review, comparison of two tools: the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the RTI item bank
Q47259028Randomized clinical trials in dentistry: Risks of bias, risks of random errors, reporting quality, and methodologic quality over the years 1955-2013.
Q34047368Relationship between Research Outcomes and Risk of Bias, Study Sponsorship, and Author Financial Conflicts of Interest in Reviews of the Effects of Artificially Sweetened Beverages on Weight Outcomes: A Systematic Review of Reviews
Q91736607Reporting of financial conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of drug trials published in high-impact medical journals: comparison of results from 2017 to 2018 and 2009
Q46070038Response to correspondence by Heather Lynch, Julie Goodman and Nancy Beck Re: "Application of the Navigation Guide systematic review methodology to the evidence for developmental and reproductive toxicity of triclosan".
Q38652686Systematic review of community health impacts of mountaintop removal mining
Q24187313Systemic antibiotics for treating diabetic foot infections
Q26773978The Effect of Disease Modifying Therapies on Disease Progression in Patients with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Q34275367The Navigation Guide - evidence-based medicine meets environmental health: integration of animal and human evidence for PFOA effects on fetal growth.
Q34275302The Navigation Guide systematic review methodology: a rigorous and transparent method for translating environmental health science into better health outcomes
Q26824991The effect of disease modifying therapies on brain atrophy in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Q36211674The effect of disease-modifying therapies on brain atrophy in patients with clinically isolated syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Q53968720The evidence base of methylphenidate for children and adolescents with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder is in fact flawed.
Q64053550The judgement of biases included in the category "other bias" in Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions: a systematic survey
Q33898415The pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents: A systematic review with network meta-analyses of randomised trials
Q34045690The relationship between study sponsorship, risks of bias, and research outcomes in atrazine exposure studies conducted in non-human animals: Systematic review and meta-analysis
Q58770735The reporting of funding in health policy and systems research: a cross-sectional study
Q28393577Use of a modified GreenScreen tool to conduct a screening-level comparative hazard assessment of conventional silver and two forms of nanosilver
Q55714559Using risk of bias domains to identify opportunities for improvement in food- and nutrition-related research: An evaluation of research type and design, year of publication, and source of funding.