ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Abstract
Non-randomised studies of the effects of interventions are critical to many areas of healthcare evaluation, but their results may be biased. It is therefore important to understand and appraise their strengths and weaknesses. We developed ROBINS-I (“Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions”), a new tool for evaluating risk of bias in estimates of the comparative effectiveness (harm or benefit) of interventions from studies that did not use randomisation to allocate units (individuals or clusters of individuals) to comparison groups. The tool will be particularly useful to those undertaking systematic reviews that include non-randomised studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
The record
- Venue
- BMJ
- Topic
- Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Field
- Economics, Econometrics and Finance
- Canadian institutions
- McGill UniversityOttawa HospitalCochraneSt. Michael's HospitalJewish General HospitalUniversity of OttawaMcMaster UniversityWomen's College HospitalPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
- Funders
- National Cancer InstituteCancer Research UKNational Institutes of HealthMedical Research CouncilUniversity of BristolNational Institute for Health and Care Research
- Keywords
- Psychological interventionMedicineStrengths and weaknessesSystematic reviewHarmMeta-analysisMEDLINEPsychologyNursingPathologySocial psychology
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes