Table 2 Approaches to assessment of imprecision and formal quantitative analyses of imprecision in Cochrane systematic reviews. Values are numbers
| Reported (no. of reviews out of 100) | |
|---|---|
| Methods section | |
| Reviewers carried out GRADE assessment | 96 |
| Criteria considered for assessing imprecision? | 13 |
| - Width of 95% confidence interval | 8 |
| - Optimal information size—no. of participants | 4 |
| - Optimal information size—no. of events | 1 |
| - Threshold for benefit or harm | 1 |
| - Trial Sequential Analysis | 2 |
| Results section | |
| Optimal information size—no. of events | 2 |
| Optimal information size—no. of participants | 8 |
| Thresholds for benefit or harm | 15 |
| Trial Sequential Analysis | 2 |
