RoB 2 assessments are directed at a specific result. These videos, originally part of the RoB 2: Learning Live webinar series, explain how to use the fifth domain of the RoB 2: bias in selection of the reported result, a type of reporting bias. The presenters explain how to answer the signalling questions in this domain, including whether the data that produced the result were analysed in accordance with a pre-specified analysis plan that was finalised before unblinded outcome data were available for analysis; and whether the numerical result being assessed is likely to have been selected, on the basis of the results, from multiple eligible outcome measurements (e.g. scales, definitions, time points) within the outcome domain or multiple eligible analyses of the data. The presenters also show the algorithm for how answers to signalling questions are mapped to judgements about risk of bias for the domains, along with worked examples.
This session was intended for people who are interested in using RoB 2 to assess risk of bias in their review. In addition to review author teams, CRG editors can learn about the risk of bias in selection of the reported result so that they are able to assist authors with any queries they may have and also ensure information included in the review for this domain is relevant.
The webinar was delivered in October 2020 and below you will find the videos from the webinar, together with accompanying slides to download [PDF].
Part 1: Introduction; selective reporting vs selective non-reporting
Part 2: Bias in selection of the reported result
Part 3: How to spot bias in selection of the reported result
Part 4: Assessing the risk of bias in selection of the reported result
Part 5: Questions and answers
Matt Page is a Senior Research Fellow in the School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine at Monash University, funded by an ARC Discovery Early Career Researcher Award. His current research interests include examining the transparency and reproducibility of systematic reviews and developing methods to address reporting biases (e.g. publication bias, selective reporting bias) in syntheses. He was an associate scientific editor for the 2019 edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and is a co-convenor of the Cochrane Bias Methods Group. He frequently collaborates with clinicians on systematic reviews of interventions for a range of conditions, which often informs his research agenda.
Isabelle Boutron is professor of epidemiology at the Université de Paris, head of the Methods Team (INSERM- Epidemiology and Statistics Research Centre-CRESS). She is director of Cochrane France and co-convenor of the Cochrane Bias Methods Group and member of the SPRIT-CONSORT executive committee. Her research focusses on meta-research, methodological issues of assessing interventions (blinding, external validity, complex interventions), transparency, reporting guidelines development and implementation and research synthesis. She is also coordinating the MiRoR projects (http://miror-ejd.eu/) an innovative and ambitious joint doctoral training programme funded by Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions, dedicated to Methods in Research on Research (MIROR) in the field of clinical research.