Risiko for bias ved blindet versus ublindet vurdering af artikler i systematiske oversigtsartikler--en gennemgang af et Cochranereview

Ann Merete Møller

Risiko for bias ved blindet versus ublindet vurdering af artikler i systematiske oversigtsartikler--en gennemgang af et Cochranereview

Department of Clinical Medicine

Abstract

A Cochrane review investigated the effect of blinding information of authors, institutions, journals and sponsorships in assessing the presence of bias in trials that were assessed for inclusion in a systematic review. Six randomized trials were included. The results of these were quite heterogeneous and from this review it is not possible to conclude anything about the effect of blinding with certainty. However, it proved time-consuming to implement a secure blinding and until further evidence appears, it is recommended to refrain from attempts to do so.

Original language	Danish
Journal	Ugeskrift for Laeger
Volume	175
Issue number	14
Pages (from-to)	951-954
Number of pages	4
ISSN	0041-5782
Publication status	Published - 1 Apr 2013

Access to Document

http://ugeskriftet.dk/videnskab/risiko-bias-ved-blindet-versus-ublindet-vurdering-af-artikler-i-systematiske

Cite this

@article{11593b4622644987b9414a4dd1a1a9dc,

title = "Risiko for bias ved blindet versus ublindet vurdering af artikler i systematiske oversigtsartikler--en gennemgang af et Cochranereview",

abstract = "A Cochrane review investigated the effect of blinding information of authors, institutions, journals and sponsorships in assessing the presence of bias in trials that were assessed for inclusion in a systematic review. Six randomized trials were included. The results of these were quite heterogeneous and from this review it is not possible to conclude anything about the effect of blinding with certainty. However, it proved time-consuming to implement a secure blinding and until further evidence appears, it is recommended to refrain from attempts to do so.",

author = "M{\o}ller, {Ann Merete}",

year = "2013",

month = apr,

day = "1",

language = "Dansk",

volume = "175",

pages = "951--954",

journal = "Ugeskrift for Laeger",

issn = "0041-5782",

publisher = "Almindelige Danske Laegeforening",

number = "14",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Risiko for bias ved blindet versus ublindet vurdering af artikler i systematiske oversigtsartikler--en gennemgang af et Cochranereview

AU - Møller, Ann Merete

PY - 2013/4/1

Y1 - 2013/4/1

N2 - A Cochrane review investigated the effect of blinding information of authors, institutions, journals and sponsorships in assessing the presence of bias in trials that were assessed for inclusion in a systematic review. Six randomized trials were included. The results of these were quite heterogeneous and from this review it is not possible to conclude anything about the effect of blinding with certainty. However, it proved time-consuming to implement a secure blinding and until further evidence appears, it is recommended to refrain from attempts to do so.

AB - A Cochrane review investigated the effect of blinding information of authors, institutions, journals and sponsorships in assessing the presence of bias in trials that were assessed for inclusion in a systematic review. Six randomized trials were included. The results of these were quite heterogeneous and from this review it is not possible to conclude anything about the effect of blinding with certainty. However, it proved time-consuming to implement a secure blinding and until further evidence appears, it is recommended to refrain from attempts to do so.

M3 - Tidsskriftartikel

SN - 0041-5782

VL - 175

SP - 951

EP - 954

JO - Ugeskrift for Laeger

JF - Ugeskrift for Laeger

IS - 14

ER -