|
Number of reviews respondent used RoB tool in (Q1)
| |
|
One
|
80 (42)
|
|
Two or three
|
75 (40)
|
|
More than three
|
33 (18)
|
|
Used RoB tool to update an existing review (Q2)
|
102 (54)
|
|
Time taken to complete RoB assessment for one study (Q3)
| |
|
Up to 10 minutes
|
23 (12)
|
|
10 to 20 minutes
|
81 (43)
|
|
20 minutes to 1 hour
|
69 (37)
|
|
More than 1 hour
|
14 (8)
|
|
Time taken is acceptable (Q4)
|
156 (83)
|
|
Used pilot testing (Q5)
|
62 (33)
|
|
Modified the RoB tool when used for randomized trials (Q7)
|
56 (31)
|
|
Used the RoB tool for non-randomized studies (Q6)
|
39 (21)
|
|
Modified the RoB tool when used for non-randomized studies (Q6a)
|
31
|
|
RoB assessments incorporated in conclusion/analysis: (Q9)a
| |
|
Sensitivity analysis by RoB judgement
|
76 (40)
|
|
Included a narrative summary
|
104 (55)
|
|
Not at all
|
26 (14)
|
|
Used direct quotes to support judgement (Q10)
| |
|
Always or nearly always
|
76 (41)
|
|
Often
|
59 (32)
|
|
Feel confident in their RoB assessments (Q12)
| |
|
Very confident
|
61 (32)
|
|
Somewhat confident
|
111 (59)
|
|
Tool is better than previous Cochrane practice (Q13)
|
165 (87)
|
|
Features respondents most liked (Q14)a
| |
|
Ability to provide information (for example quotes)
|
140 (74)
|
|
Standardized approach
|
153 (81)
|
|
Features respondents least liked (Q15)a
| |
|
Judgement options (Yes/No/Unclear) confusing
|
69 (36)
|
|
Time taken to complete
|
56 (29)
|
|
Encountered problems with assessing sequence generation (Q17)
|
82 (44)
|
|
Encountered problems with assessing allocation concealment (Q18)
|
90 (50)
|
|
Encountered problems with assessing blinding (Q19)
|
94 (52)
|
|
Encountered problems with assessing incomplete outcome data (Q20)
|
122 (67)
|
|
Encountered problems with assessing selective outcome reporting (Q21)
|
110 (60)
|
|
Encountered problems with assessing other bias (Q22)
|
107 (58)
|
|
Other bias domain is helpful (Q23)
|
108 (61)
|
|
Use standard ‘other sources of bias’ (Q24)
|
53 (29)
|
