Skip to main content

Table 1 Tools reported by the systematic review/meta-analysis authors that were used for the assessment of quality or risk of bias of the included studies more than once (N = 678)

From: Methodological tools and sensitivity analysis for assessing quality or risk of bias used in systematic reviews published in the high-impact anesthesiology journals

ToolN (%)
Cochrane tool for RoB assessment251 (37)
 Non-modified version241 (36)
 Modified version10 (1.4)
Jadad tool99 (15)
 Non-modified version92 (14)
 Modified version7 (1.0)
Newcastle-Ottawa scale or its adapted version30 (4.4)
 Oxford scale29 (4.3)
 Non-modified version10 (1.5)
 Modified version19 (2.7)
Criteria of Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)24 (3.5)
Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE)18 (2.7)
Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM)14 (2.0)
Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA)10 (1.5)
Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) or QUADAS-27 (1.0)
Criteria of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF)5 (0.7)
Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT)4 (0.6)
The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) checklist for RCTs4 (0.6)
Quality in prognosis studies (QUIPS) tool3 (0.4)
Downs and Black3 (0.4)
Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) checklist2 (0.3)
Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) evaluation scale2 (0.3)
Strengthening of the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE)2 (0.3)
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) recommendations checklist2 (0.3)