Domain | Support for judgement | Review authors’ judgement | |
Selection bias. | |||
Random quence generation. | Describe the method ud to generate the allocation quence in sufficient detail to allow an asssment of whether it should produce comparable groups. | Selection bias (biad allocation to interventions) due to inadequate generation of a randomid quence. | |
男图Allocation concealment. | Describe the method ud to conceal the allocation quence in sufficient detail to determine whether intervention allocations could have been foreen in advance of, or during, enrolment. | Selection bias (biad allocation to interventions) due to inadequate concealment of allocations prior to assignment. | |
Performance bias. | |||
Blinding of participants and personnel麻花辫怎么画 Asssments should be made for each main outcome (or class of outcomes).? | Describe all measures ud, if any, to blind study participants and personnel from knowledge of which intervention a participant received. Provide any information relating to whether the intended blinding was effective. | Performance bias due to knowledge of the allocated interventions by participants and personnel during the study. | |
Detection bias. | |||
Blinding of outcome asssment Asssments should be made for each main outcome (or class of outcomes). | Describe all measures ud, if any, to blind outcome asssors from knowledge of which intervention a participant received. Provide any information relating to whether the intended blinding was effective. | Detection bias due to knowledge of the allocated interventions by outcome asssors. | |
Attrition bias. | |||
Incomplete outcome data Asssments should be made for each main outcome (or class of outcomes).? | Describe the completeness of outcome data for each main outcome, including attrition and exclusions from the analysis. State whether attrition and exclusions were reported, the numbers in each intervention group (compared with total randomized participants), reasons for attrition/exclusions where reported, and any re-inclusions in analys performed by the review authors. | Attrition bias due to amount, nature or handling of incomplete outcome data. | |
Reporting bias. | |||
Selective reporting. | 菜苋State how the possibility of lective outcome reporting was examined by the review authors, and what was found. | Reporting bias due to lective outcome reporting. | |
Other bias. | 香蕉面包 | ||
Other sources of bias. | State any important concerns about bias not addresd in the other domains in the tool. If particular questions/entries were pre-specified in the review’s protocol, respons should be provided for each question/entry. | Bias due to problems not covered elwhere in the table. | |
RANDOM SEQUENCE GENERATION Selection bias (biad allocation to interventions) due to inadequate generation of a randomid quence. | |||
Criteria for a judgement of ‘Low risk’ of bias. | The investigators describe a random component in the quence generation process such as: 创世十大元素 ∙ Referring to a random number table; ∙ Using a computer random number generator; ∙ Coin tossing; ∙ Shuffling cards or envelopes; ∙ Throwing dice; ∙ Drawing of lots; ∙ Minimization*. ?*Minimization may be implemented without a random element, and this is considered to be equivalent to being random. | ||
Criteria for the judgement of ‘High risk’ of bias. | The investigators describe a non-random component in the quence generation process. Usually, the description would involve some systematic, non-random approach, for example: ∙ Sequence generated by odd or even date of birth; ∙ 关于春节的开头Sequence generated by some rule bad on date (or day) of admission; ∙ Sequence generated by some rule bad on hospital or clinic record number. Other non-random approaches happen much less frequently than the systematic approaches mentioned above and tend to be obvious.? They usually involve judgement or some method of non-random categorization of participants, for example: ∙ Allocation by judgement of the clinician; ∙ Allocation by preference of the participant; ∙ Allocation bad on the results of a laboratory test or a ries of tests; ∙ Allocation by availability of the intervention. | ||
Criteria for the judgement of ?‘Unclear risk’ of bias. | Insufficient information about the quence generation process to permit judgement of ‘Low risk’ or ‘High risk’. | ||
ALLOCATION CONCEALMENT? Selection bias (biad allocation to interventions) due to inadequate concealment of allocations prior to assignment. | |||
Criteria for a judgement of ‘Low risk’ of bias. | Participants and investigators enrolling participants could not foree assignment becau one of the following, or an equivalent method, was ud to conceal allocation: ∙ Central allocation (including telephone, web-bad and pharmacy-controlled randomization); ∙ Sequentially numbered drug containers of identical appearance; ∙ 新闻题目Sequentially numbered, opaque, aled envelopes. | ||
本文发布于:2023-06-02 05:51:02，感谢您对本站的认可！
本文链接：https://www.wtabcd.cn/fanwen/fan/82/831378.html
版权声明：本站内容均来自互联网，仅供演示用，请勿用于商业和其他非法用途。如果侵犯了您的权益请与我们联系，我们将在24小时内删除。
| 留言与评论（共有 0 条评论） |
