letter Open AccessTop 1% cited
RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
BMJ · 2019 · Vol. 366 · pp. l4898–l4898
Jonathan A C Sterne✉(University of Bristol)Jelena Savović(University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust)Matthew J. Page(Monash University)Roy G. Elbers(University of Bristol)Natalie Blencowe(University of Bristol)Isabelle Boutron(Délégation Paris 5)Christopher J Cates(St George's, University of London)Hung‐Yuan Cheng(University of Bristol)Mark Corbett(University of York)Sandra Eldridge(Queen Mary University of London)Jonathan Emberson(University of Oxford)Miguel A. Hernán(Harvard–MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology)Sally Hopewell(Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre)Asbjørn Hróbjartsson(University of Southern Denmark)Daniela R. Junqueira(University of Alberta)Peter Jüni(St. Michael's Hospital)Jamie J Kirkham(University of Manchester)Toby J Lasserson(Cochrane)Tianjing Li(Johns Hopkins University)Alexandra McAleenan(University of Bristol)Barnaby C Reeves(University of Bristol)Sasha Shepperd(University of Oxford)Ian Shrier(Jewish General Hospital)Lesley Stewart(University of York)Kate Tilling(University of Bristol)Ian R. White(MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL)Penny Whiting(University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust)Julian P. T. Higgins(University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust)
Abstract
Assessment of risk of bias is regarded as an essential component of a systematic review on the effects of an intervention. The most commonly used tool for randomised trials is the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. We updated the tool to respond to developments in understanding how bias arises in randomised trials, and to address user feedback on and limitations of the original tool.
Meta-analysis and systematic reviewsHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeDelphi Technique in ResearchSystematic reviewMedicineRandomized controlled trialPublication biasClinical trialMEDLINEComputer scienceMeta-analysisMedical physicsInternal medicine
MeSH terms
Research DesignBias
Funding
- Amgen
- Eli Lilly and Company
- CHDI Foundation
- Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
- Wellcome Trust
- University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust
- Medicines Company
- NIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre
- Cancer Research UK
- National Institute for Health and Care Research
- Department of Health and Social Care
- University of Bristol
- Canada Research Chairs
- Biosensors International Group
- National Institutes of Health
- Medical Research Council
- National Health and Medical Research Council
Citations
28,711
FWCI
1305.25
field-weighted impact
References
22
Percentile
100%
vs. same field & year
Citations per year
Cited by
KDIGO 2024 Clinical Practice Guideline for the Evaluation and Management of Chronic Kidney Disease
Kidney International · 2024 · 6,803 citations
Mortality in sepsis and septic shock in Europe, North America and Australia between 2009 and 2019— results from a systematic review and meta-analysis
Critical Care · 2020 · 820 citations
CINeMA: An approach for assessing confidence in the results of a network meta-analysis
PLoS Medicine · 2020 · 1,581 citations
The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · 2021 · 3,951 citations
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Biometrics · 1977 · 77,212 citations
The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
PLoS Medicine · 2021 · 4,711 citations
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
BMJ · 2021 · 86,700 citations
PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews
BMJ · 2021 · 10,309 citations
References
Industry sponsorship and research outcome
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2017 · 1,567 citations
The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
BMJ · 2011 · 33,606 citations
GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction—GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · 2011 · 10,137 citations
QUADAS-2: A Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies
Annals of Internal Medicine · 2011 · 13,616 citations
GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
BMJ · 2008 · 21,184 citations
ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions
BMJ · 2016 · 18,045 citations
Citation Network
How this paper connects to the literature. Drag to explore, click any node to open that paper.