Skip to main content

Table 3 Agreement and disagreement in systematic review findings from replicated Jadad assessments

From: How can clinicians choose between conflicting and discordant systematic reviews? A replication study of the Jadad algorithm

Discordant Review

Discordant Review authors’ or our Jadad assessments

Review(s) chosen by the Discordant Review

(First author Year)

Cochrane or non-Cochrane SR

Risk of bias in the review

Type of effect estimate

Pooled effect sizes and 95% CI

Statistical significance (p-value of the effect estimate)

Results favourable, null, or unfavourable

Direction of effect

Bakdach 2020

Discordant Review authors

Sardana 2018

Non-Cochrane

Low

Risk ratio

0.39 (0.26–0.59)

0.005

Favourable

Disagree

 

Our Choice

Tasios 2019

(and Sardana 2019)

Non-Cochrane

Low

Risk ratio

0.46 (0.18-1.15)

0.1

Null

Chalmers 2015

Discordant Review authors

Pulavarti 2007

Cochrane

Low

Risk ratio

0.89 (0.09, 8.72)

0.92

Null

Agree

 

Our Choice

Lenters

(and Pulavarti 2007)

Non-Cochrane

Low

Risk ratio

1.31 (0.51, 3.34)

0.58

Null

Chen 2019

Discordant Review authors

Shen 2017

Non-Cochrane

Low

Mean difference

-17.39 (-22.32, -12.46)

< 0.00001

Favourable

Agree

 

Our Choice

Dai et al. 2017

Non-Cochrane

Low

Mean difference

-2.83 (-4.26, -1.39)

0.0001

Favourable

Fu 2019

Discordant Review authors

Rabi et al. 2015

Non-Cochrane

High

Mean difference

1.63 (-2.84, 6.11)

0.47

Null

Agree

 

Our Choice

Handoll 2012

Cochrane

Low

Mean difference

2.36 (-3.52, 8.24)

0.43

Null

Guo 2018

Discordant Review authors

Xia 2014

Non-Cochrane

High

Risk ratio

1.19 (1.05, 1.35)

0.006

Favourable

Agree

 

Our Choice

Hu 2011

Non-Cochrane

Low

Odds Ratio

3.34 (1.92, 5.81)

< 0.0001

Favourable

Houck 2017

Discordant Review authors

Riboh 2014

Non-Cochrane

Low

Mean difference

14.70 (5.52, 23.87)

0.002

Favourable

Agree

 

Our Choice

Chan 2014

Non-Cochrane

High

Mean difference

1.05 (0.03, 2.06)

0.04

Favourable

Mascarenhas 2014

Discordant Review authors

Millett 2014

Non-Cochrane

Low

Mean difference

-3.7 (-8.8, 1.4)

0.16

Null

Agree

 

Our Choice

Sheibani-Rad 2013

Non-Cochrane

High

Mean difference

0.159 (-0.08, 0.40)

0.255

Null

Pekala 2019

Discordant Review authors

Pabalan 2016

Non-Cochrane

High

Odds ratio

0.99 (0.75, 1.31)

0.95

Null

Agree

 

Our Choice

Nong 2016

(and Pabalan 2016)

Non-Cochrane

Low

Odds ratio

1.13 (0.76–1.69)

0.55

Null

Song 2016

Discordant Review authors

Cao 2015

Non-Cochrane

High

Risk ratio

0.41 (0.07, 2.52)

0.34

Null

Agree

 

Discordant Review authors

Wu 2015

Non-Cochrane

Low

Risk ratio

0.98 (0.2, 4.75)

0.98

Null

 

Our Choice

Gurusamy 2013

Cochrane

Low

Odds ratio

0.49 (0.05, 4.72)

0.54

Null

Tan 2018

Discordant Review authors

Feng 2015

Non-Cochrane

Low

Mean difference

-0.18 (-0.36, -0.00)

0.04

Favourable

Disagree

 

Our Choice

Lin 2013

Non-Cochrane

High

Mean difference

0.05 (-0.49, 0.59)

0.87

Null

Xing 2016

Discordant Review authors

Bellamy 2006

Cochrane

High

Mean difference

-13.00 (-17.77, -8.33)

< 0.00001

Favourable

Agree

 

Our Choice

Richette 2015

(and Bellamy 2006)

Non-Cochrane

High

Standardised mean difference

-0.21 (-0.32, -0.1)

NR

Favourable

Zhao 2015a

Discordant Review authors

Ouyang 2013

Non-Cochrane

Low

Risk ratio

1.20 (0.63, 2.28)

0.58

Null

Agree

 

Our Choice

Heineman 2010

Non-Cochrane

Low

Risk Ratio

0.71 (0.28, 1.76)

0.45

Null

Zhiyong 2019

Discordant Review authors

Sun et al. 2016

Non-Cochrane

Low

Mean difference

-0.12 (-0.33, 0.09)

0.28

Null

Disagree

 

Our Choice

Feng 2015

Non-Cochrane

Low

Mean difference

-0.18 (-0.36, -0.00)

0.04

Favourable