I'm starting a systematic review which will include systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies, qualitative research, and mixed-methods studies. We will be conducting a thematic analysis of the key findings and presenting our results as a narrative summary.
Should I conduct a risk of bias assessment for the papers in this review? And if so, what tools would be recommended? I've been looking at CASP checklists, but I'm unsure if I should use a different tool depending on the type of paper (given there are different CASP checklists for different methodologies), or if perhaps there is a different template people would recommend?
Hello Karen,
I would recommend to use an appropriate tool for each study type. JBI (https://jbi.global/critical-appraisal-tools) has different tools for different study types, this will allow comparability across them. There is not one tool to cover all the study types you mentioned because there are different criteria for assessing bias in A RCT versus a qualitative study
Hello! It is okay to use CASP tools, as I did myself. I would recommend using a diverse array of tools specialised for each of these types of papers.
In terms of assessing the risk of bias, yes, it is highly recommended to conduct a risk of bias (RoB) assessment for the studies included in your review. This will help you evaluate the quality of the studies, identify potential sources of bias, and ensure the robustness of your conclusions.
Using the appropriate tool for each type of study (e.g., CASP for qualitative, RoB 2 for RCTs, NOS for observational studies) is the best approach.
Tools you can consider: There are a number of tools available for assessing the risk of bias, and it’s important to select the one that best aligns with the study designs included in your review. Here’s an overview of recommended tools for different types of study designs:
For Randomized controlled trials (RCTs):
- Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (RoB 2): This is the most commonly used tool for assessing the risk of bias in RCTs. It focuses on specific areas such as randomization, blinding, and incomplete outcome data. [https://sites.google.com/site/riskofbiastool/welcome/rob-2-0-tool/current-version-of-rob-2]
For observational studies:
- Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS): This is a popular tool for assessing the quality of non-randomized studies, particularly cohort and case-control studies. [https://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp]
- ROBINS-I (Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions): This is another comprehensive tool to assess the risk of bias in non-randomized intervention studies. [https://www.riskofbias.info/welcome/robins-i-v2]
For qualitative studies:
- JBI checklist for qualitative research: https://jbi.global/critical-appraisal-tools
- CASP qualitative checklist: https://casp-uk.net/casp-tools-checklists/
For mixed-methods studies:
- The MMAT Version 2018 is the latest version of the tool and is highly recommended for assessing the methodological quality of mixed-methods studies. It includes criteria for evaluating the quality of studies that combine qualitative and quantitative data, offering a more holistic assessment. [https://www.nccmt.ca/knowledge-repositories/search/232]
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Entomology
- Resistance