Skip to main content

Table 4 Risk of bias assessment of the observational studies a

From: Screening for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Cohort study

Representativeness of exposed cohort

Selection of unexposed cohort

Ascertainment of exposure

Demonstration that outcome not present at study start

Comparability of cohorts on age

Comparability of cohorts on other factors

Assessment of outcome

Adequate length of follow-up

Adequacy of follow-up cohorts

Overall scoreb

Herbert et al. [21]

✓ Truly representative

✓ Same community

✓ Secure record

✓ Yes

✓ Yes

No

✓ Record linkage

✓ Yes (3 years)

✓ All subjects followed

8

Rebolj et al. [22]

✗

Case control study

Adequate case definition

Representative cases

Selection of controls

Definition of controls

Comparability of controls on age

Comparability of controls on other factors

Ascertainment of exposure

Method of ascertainment

Non-response rate

Overall score b

Andrae et al. [24]

✓ Independently validated

✓ Consecutive cases

✓ Community controls

✓ No history of disease

✓ Yes

No

✓ Secure record

✓ Same for both groups

✓ Same for both groups

8

Aristizabal et al.[15]

✓ Independently validated

✓ Representative cases

✓ Community and hospital controls

Not stated

✓ Yes

✓ Neighborhood

✓ Secure record and non-blinded interview

✓ Same for both groups

Not stated

7

Berrino et al.[16]

✓ Independently validated

✓ Consecutive cases

Hospital controls

✓ No history of disease

✓ Yes

No

✓ Secure record

✓ Same for both groups

✓ Same for both groups

7

Clarke and Anderson [17]

✓ Independently validated

✓ Representative cases

✓ Community controls

Not stated

✓ Yes

✓ Neighborhood and type of dwelling

✓ Secure record and non-blinded interview

✓ Same for both groups

Non-respondents described

7

Decker et al.[25]

✓ Independently validated

✓ Consecutive cases

✓ Community controls

✓ No history of disease

✓

✓ Area of residence

✓ Secure record

✓ Same for both groups

✓ Same for both groups

9

Hernández-Avila et al.[26]

✓ Independently validated

✓ Representative cases

✓ Community controls

Not stated

✓Yes

✓ Age of sexual debut, # normal births, # sex partners, SES

Non-blinded interview

✓ Same for both groups

Rate different/no designation

6

Herrero et al.[18]

✓ Independently validated

Not stated

Hospital controls

✓ No history of disease

No

No

Non-blinded interview

✓ Same for both groups

✓ Same for both groups

4

Hoffman et al.[27]

✓ Independently validated

Not stated

Hospital controls

✓ No history of disease

✓ Yes

✓ Race, area of residence, hospital

Interview

✓ Same for both groups

✓ Same for both groups

6

Jiménez-Pérez and Thomas [28]

✓ Independently validated

✓ Consecutive cases

Hospital controls

✓ No history of disease

✓ Yes

✓ Area of residence

Non-blinded interview

✓ Same for both groups

✓ Same for both groups

7

Kasinpila et al.[38]

✓ Independently validated

✓ Consecutive cases

Hospital controls

✓ No history of disease

✓ Yes

✓ Significant risk factors

Non-blinded interview

✓ Same for both groups

✓ Same for both groups

7

La Vecchia et al.[19]

✓ Independently validated

✓ Representative cases

Hospital controls

✓ No history of disease

✓ Yes

No

Interview

✓ Same for both groups

✓ Same for both groups

6

Makino et al.[29]

✓ Independently validated

Potential for selection bias

✓ Community controls

✓ No history of disease

✓ Yes

✓ Area of residence

Self-report

✓ Same for both groups

✓ Same for both groups

7

Miller et al.[31]

✓ Independently validated

Potential for selection bias

Hospital controls

✓ No history of disease

✓ Yes

✓ Length of membership in health program, race/ethnicity

✓ Secure record

✓ Same for both groups

✓ Same for both groups

7

Nieminen et al.[23]

✓ Independently validated

✓ Consecutive cases

✓ Community controls

Not stated

✓ Yes

✓ Socio-demographics, parity, smoking

Self-report

✓ Same for both groups

Rate different/no designation

6

Sasieni et al.[32–35]

✓ Independently validated

✓ Consecutive cases

✓ Community controls

Not stated

✓ Yes

✓ Area of residence

✓ Secure record

✓ Same for both groups

✓ Same for both groups

8

Talbott et al.[30]

✓ Independently validated

✓ Consecutive cases

✓ Community controls

Not stated

✓ Yes

✓ Sex, race, street or neighborhood

Non-blinded interview

✓ Same for both groups

✓ Same for both groups

7

Yang et al.[36]

Record linkage

Not stated

Hospital controls

✓ No history of disease

✓ Yes

No

✓ Secure record

✓ Same for both groups

✓ Same for both groups

5

Zappa et al.[37]

✓ Independently validated

✓ Consecutive cases

✓ Community controls

Not stated

✓ Yes

No

✓ Secure record

✓ Same for both groups

✓ Same for both groups

7

  1. aRisk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale [39]; b A higher overall score (maximum = 9) corresponds to a lower risk of bias.
  2. ✓ The study met this assessment criterion. ✗ This study could not be assessed with this scale. There was no unexposed cohort; both cohorts received screening. The two groups differed in terms of their age at exposure.