Principles and framework for assessing the risk of bias for studies included in comparative quantitative environmental systematic reviews
Posted on 2022-03-30 - 03:52
Abstract The internal validity of conclusions about effectiveness or impact in systematic reviews, and of decisions based on them, depends on risk of bias assessments being conducted appropriately. However, a random sample of 50 recently-published articles claiming to be quantitative environmental systematic reviews found 64% did not include any risk of bias assessment, whilst nearly all that did omitted key sources of bias. Other limitations included lack of transparency, conflation of quality constructs, and incomplete application of risk of bias assessments to the data synthesis. This paper addresses deficiencies in risk of bias assessments by highlighting core principles that are required for risk of bias assessments to be fit-for-purpose, and presenting a framework based on these principles to guide review teams on conducting risk of bias assessments appropriately and consistently. The core principles require that risk of bias assessments be Focused, Extensive, Applied and Transparent (FEAT). These principles support risk of bias assessments, appraisal of risk of bias tools, and the development of new tools. The framework follows a Plan-Conduct-Apply-Report approach covering all stages of risk of bias assessment. The scope of this paper is comparative quantitative environmental systematic reviews which address PICO or PECO-type questions including, but not limited to, topic areas such as environmental management, conservation, ecosystem restoration, and analyses of environmental interventions, exposures, impacts and risks.
CITE THIS COLLECTION
DataCite
3 Biotech
3D Printing in Medicine
3D Research
3D-Printed Materials and Systems
4OR
AAPG Bulletin
AAPS Open
AAPS PharmSciTech
Abhandlungen aus dem Mathematischen Seminar der Universität Hamburg
ABI Technik (German)
Academic Medicine
Academic Pediatrics
Academic Psychiatry
Academic Questions
Academy of Management Discoveries
Academy of Management Journal
Academy of Management Learning and Education
Academy of Management Perspectives
Academy of Management Proceedings
Academy of Management Review
Frampton, Geoff; Whaley, Paul; Bennett, Micah; Bilotta, Gary; Dorne, Jean-Lou C. M.; Eales, Jacqualyn; et al. (2022). Principles and framework for assessing the risk of bias for studies included in comparative quantitative environmental systematic reviews. figshare. Collection. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.5921277.v1
or
Select your citation style and then place your mouse over the citation text to select it.
SHARE
Usage metrics
AUTHORS (15)
GF
Geoff Frampton
PW
Paul Whaley
MB
Micah Bennett
GB
Gary Bilotta
JD
Jean-Lou C. M. Dorne
JE
Jacqualyn Eales
KJ
Katy James
CK
Christian Kohl
ML
Magnus Land
BL
Barbara Livoreil
DM
David Makowski
EM
Evans Muchiri
GP
Gillian Petrokofsky
NR
Nicola Randall
KS
Kate Schofield