Systematic reviews seek to identify all research that meets the eligibility criteria. However,
this goal can be compromised by 'non‐reporting bias'. The convincing evidence for the …

Bias can arise because of the actions of primary study investigators or because of the
actions of review authors, or may be unavoidable due to constraints on how research can be …

The methods and results of systematic reviews should be reported in sufficient detail to allow
users to assess the trustworthiness and applicability of the review findings. The Preferred …

Assessment of risk of bias is regarded as an essential component of a systematic review on
the effects of an intervention. The most commonly used tool for randomised trials is the …

Comparative diagnostic test accuracy studies assess and compare the accuracy of 2 or
more tests in the same study. Although these studies have the potential to yield reliable …

Evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials is not optimal. The
lack of transparent reporting impedes readers from judging the reliability and validity of trial …

AP value, or the magnitude or direction of results can influence decisions about whether,
when, and how research findings are disseminated. Regardless of whether an entire study …

Flaws in the design of randomized trials may bias intervention effect estimates and increase
between-trial heterogeneity. Empirical evidence suggests that these problems are greatest …

BackgroundA recently updated Cochrane review supports the efficacy of psychotherapy for
borderline personality disorder (BPD). AimsTo evaluate the effects of standalone and add …

Objectives To study the impact of blinding on estimated treatment effects, and their variation
between trials; differentiating between blinding of patients, healthcare providers, and …