Clinical experts are a critical part of the review team and are involved in all phases of the 297 review process (e.g., providing guidance on the development of the review protocol; assisting in the critical appraisal of clinical 298 evidence; interpreting the clinical relevance of the results; and providing guidance on the potential place in therapy). [...] 384 Once the reviewers were satisfied with their understanding of the selection criteria, the two reviewers independently screened the 385 titles and abstracts of all the citations retrieved from the literature searches for relevance to the clinical research question in Microsoft 386 Excel workbooks. [...] 408 Risk of Bias Assessment 409 The reviewers used the following risk of bias assessment, according to the study design of the included studies: 410 • Outcome-level risk of bias of relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs), based on the effect of assignment to the 411 intervention (i.e., intention-to-treat effect), was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, version 2 (RoB 2).41 This 412. [...] The following 440 criteria was considered: the risk of bias of the contributing studies, the precision of the effect estimates, and the generalizability (or 441 applicability) of the findings to Canadian clinical practice. [...] There is uncertainty in the evidence, due to the high risk of bias, relatively small sample size, and the absence of any measure of precision for the absolute differences, which limits the interpretation of the results.
- Pages
- 74
- Published in
- Canada
