{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,30]],"date-time":"2026-06-30T20:00:03Z","timestamp":1782849603326,"version":"3.54.5"},"reference-count":156,"publisher":"SAGE Publications","issue":"2","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,5]],"date-time":"2026-05-05T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1777939200000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-nc\/4.0\/"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,5]],"date-time":"2026-05-05T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1777939200000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/page\/policies\/text-and-data-mining-license"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["journals.sagepub.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Campbell Systematic Reviews: Better Evidence for a Better World"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,6]]},"abstract":"<jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Critical appraisal of the studies included in a systematic review is essential to ensure that results of the review are properly interpreted. Critical appraisal is also one of the most difficult steps in research reviews. Structured risk of bias (ROB) tools can facilitate critical appraisal, but these tools vary in content and structure, and there are unresolved issues in applications of these tools. Assessment of risk of reporting biases, such as outcome reporting bias (ORB) and analysis reporting bias (ARB), is especially difficult, given the lack of availability of the raw materials (such as prospectively registered protocols or analysis plans) needed to properly assess the risk of selective reporting and selective non-reporting of outcomes and analyses.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Objectives<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>To identify methods used in recent Campbell systematic reviews of intervention effects to assess the risk of selective reporting biases in included studies.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Search Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>We searched the Campbell Library website, using a structured online form developed for this purpose, with filters for publication dates (all dates in 2020 through April 2023) and type of document (completed reviews only).<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Selection Criteria<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>We included systematic reviews (SRs) of primary studies of intervention effects published in Campbell Systematic Reviews between 1 January 2020 and 30 April 2023.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Data Collection and Analysis<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Of the 59 SRs published from 2020 through early 2023, 51 were eligible for our review. Forty-nine of these reviews included relevant studies of intervention effects. From these 49 reviews, we extracted data on methods used to assess risk of reporting biases (ORB and ARB), broader risk of bias (ROB) or study quality assessments, and adherence to 12 mandatory methodological standards. Data extraction and coding were performed in duplicate, by pairs of team members who worked independently, and any discrepancies were resolved by coders or by the review team. Results were compiled in a spreadsheet, which was used to generate tables, graphics, and a narrative summary.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Main Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Reporting biases were defined and assessed in diverse and sometimes idiosyncratic ways in recent Campbell systematic reviews of intervention effects. Most (40 of 49) reviews conducted some structured assessment of reporting biases, but many did not report results of these assessments. Explanation and documentation of ORB and ARB assessments was missing in more than half (28) of the reviews. Only 12 reviews provided full documentation for their ORB\/ARB assessments.<\/jats:p>\n                    <jats:p>Overall, we found that reviewers\u2019 descriptions of their assessments of reporting biases were often incomplete and inconsistent across studies. In many cases, these assessment practices did not reflect current understanding of the prevalence of selective reporting and ways in which these biases can undermine the validity of and confidence in results of research reviews. This observation is consistent with the fact that most reviews did not consider the potential impacts of risks of bias on the credibility of their results.<\/jats:p>\n                    <jats:p>None of the recent reviews appeared to meet all (12) of the mandatory methodological standards we assessed. On average, these reviews failed to meet 4.9 of these standards (SD = 2.3); almost three-quarters (35) of the reviews failed to meet four or more standards.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Authors\u2019 Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Recent Campbell reviews did not consistently appraise or document risks of reporting biases in the studies they included. Assessment of risk of reporting biases is difficult, given the lack of availability of prospective, public protocols or analysis plans for most studies.<\/jats:p>\n                    <jats:p>Reviewers\u2019 failure to adhere to Campbell\u2019s mandatory methodological standards and editors\u2019 apparent inability to enforce these standards can be understood as functions of the contexts in which systematic reviews are highly desirable, highly cited, and under-resourced.<\/jats:p>\n                    <jats:p>We provide a decision tree to guide reviewers\u2019 assessments of reporting bias, along with nine recommendations for improving these practices in systematic reviews of intervention effects. Our recommendations include more deliberate use of eligibility criteria to eliminate studies that cannot provide valid answers to review questions, thorough documentation of reviewers\u2019 assessment processes and ROB ratings, and explicit use of ROB ratings in interpretation of results.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1177\/18911803261435892","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,30]],"date-time":"2026-06-30T19:40:50Z","timestamp":1782848450000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/sage-journals-update-policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Assessment of Selective Reporting Biases in Studies Included in Campbell Systematic Reviews: A Systematic Review"],"prefix":"10.1177","volume":"22","author":[{"given":"Julia H.","family":"Littell","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Bryn Mawr College"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Jeffrey C.","family":"Valentine","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"University of Louisville"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Dennis M.","family":"Gorman","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Texas A&M University"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Therese D.","family":"Pigott","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Georgia State University"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"179","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,5]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_3_5_2_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1101\/2022.09.01.22279512"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_3_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.m982"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_4_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1181"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_5_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1445"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_6_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/CHI.0b013e3181bfd669"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_7_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0096920"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_8_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0227580"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_9_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1296"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_10_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/jrsm.1695"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_11_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/jrsm.1703"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_12_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3109\/16066359909004372"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_13_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1206"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_14_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1258"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_15_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2015.09.009"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_16_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2017.04.021"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_17_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/acps.12647"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_18_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1225"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_19_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1106"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_20_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1167"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_21_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1218"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_22_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/s13063-022-06641-x"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_23_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.1990.03440100121018"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_24_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1038\/s41562-021-01193-7"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_25_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2017.13001"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_26_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1091"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_27_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1239"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_28_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1291"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_29_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1209"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_30_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1082"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_31_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMe048225"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_32_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1081"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_33_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1152"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_34_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0003081"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_35_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/1745-6215-11-52"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_36_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0066844"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_37_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1234"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_38_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1271"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_39_1","volume-title":"Suggested risk of bias criteria for EPOC reviews","author":"EPOC (Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care)","year":"2017","unstructured":"EPOC (Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care). (2017). Suggested risk of bias criteria for EPOC reviews (EPOC Resources for Review Authors). https:\/\/epoc.cochrane.org\/sites\/epoc.cochrane.org\/files\/uploads\/Resources-for-authors2017\/suggested_risk_of_bias_criteria_for_epoc_reviews.pdf (Accessed 26 March 2025)."},{"key":"e_1_3_5_40_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.4324\/9780203166697_chapter_2"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_41_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0127495"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_42_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1124"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_43_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1282"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_44_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1210"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_45_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1185"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_46_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1143"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_47_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/s13063-019-3173-2"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_48_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1195"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_49_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.childyouth.2017.07.009"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_50_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/alcalc\/agab050"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_51_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1092"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_52_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1038\/s41562-022-01497-2"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_53_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/s13063-016-1310-8"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_54_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0017242"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_55_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2012.07.005"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_56_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.b4012"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_57_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1037\/1082-989X.9.4.426"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_58_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1086"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_59_1","volume-title":"Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0","author":"Higgins J. P. T.","year":"2011","unstructured":"Higgins J. P. T., Green S. (2011). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0. Wiley."},{"key":"e_1_3_5_60_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Higgins J. P. T. Morgan R. L. Rooney A. A. Taylor K. W. Thayer K. A. Silva R. A. Lemeris C. Akl E. A. Bateson T. F. Berkman N. D. Glenn B. S. Hr\u00f3bjartsson A. LaKind J. S. McAleenan A. Meerpohl J. J. Nachman R. M. Obbagy J. E. O\u2019Connor A. Radke E. G. Viswanathan M. (2024). A tool to assess risk of bias in non-randomized follow-up studies of exposure effects (ROBINS-E). Environment International 186 Article 108602. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.envint.2024.108602","DOI":"10.1016\/j.envint.2024.108602"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_61_1","volume-title":"Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2)","author":"Higgins J. P. T.","year":"2019","unstructured":"Higgins J. P. T., Savovi\u0107 J., Page M. J., Sterne J. A. C., on behalf of the RoB2 Development Group. (2019). Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2). https:\/\/www.Riskofbias.Info\/Welcome\/Rob-2-0-Tool\/Current-Version-of-Rob-2."},{"key":"e_1_3_5_62_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1089"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_63_1","unstructured":"Hombrados J. Waddington & H. (2012a). A tool to assess risk of bias in experimental and quasi\u2010experimental research. Unpublished manuscript. International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie)."},{"key":"e_1_3_5_64_1","unstructured":"Hombrados J. Waddington H. (2012b). Internal validity in social experiments and quasi-experiments: An assessment tool for reviewers (working paper). International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie). Online Appendix C. Accessed17 November 2025 at:https:\/\/www.3ieimpact.org\/sites\/default\/files\/2021-10\/SR47-Online-appendix-C-Risk-of-bias-assessment-tool.pdf"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_65_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/pan\/mps021"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_66_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1257"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_67_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1141"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_68_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/1468-0009.12210"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_69_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1253"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_70_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2020.09.033"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_71_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2016.08.012"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_72_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.323.7303.42"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_73_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.282.11.1054"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_74_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1127"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_75_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1165"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_76_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/alcalc\/agaa050"},{"issue":"3","key":"e_1_3_5_77_1","first-page":"CD012880","article-title":"Alcoholics anonymous and other 12-step programs for alcohol use disorder","volume":"2020","author":"Kelly J. F.","year":"2020","unstructured":"Kelly J. F., Humphreys K., Ferri M. (2020b). Alcoholics anonymous and other 12-step programs for alcohol use disorder. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2020(3), CD012880. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/14651858.CD012880.pub2","journal-title":"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_78_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.k3802"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_79_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.c365"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_80_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1233"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_81_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/2833373X.2024.2376046"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_82_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1001\/jamainternmed.2022.1551"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_83_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1156"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_84_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1150"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_85_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2024.111341"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_86_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1071"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_87_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1112"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_88_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/s13643-022-01998-1"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_89_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1158"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_90_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1332"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_91_1","volume-title":"Assessment of reporting biases in studies included in Campbell systematic reviews: Supplemental data file (version 1)","author":"Littell J. H.","year":"2025","unstructured":"Littell J. H., Valentine J. C., Gorman D. M., Pigott T. D. (2025). Assessment of reporting biases in studies included in Campbell systematic reviews: Supplemental data file (version 1). OSF. https:\/\/osf.io\/58bys"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_92_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1214"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_93_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/BF01173636"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_94_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1162"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_95_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1111"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_96_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1088"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_97_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1046\/j.1360-0443.2002.00019.x"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_98_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2020.06.015"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_99_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2022.09.003"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_100_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1154"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_101_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cesm.12031"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_102_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1173"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_103_1","article-title":"Selective outcome reporting as a source of bias in reviews of comparative effectiveness","author":"Norris S. L.","year":"2012","unstructured":"Norris S. L., Holmer H. K., Ogden L. A., Fu R., Abou-Setta A. M., Viswanathan M. S., McPheeters M. L. (2012). Selective outcome reporting as a source of bias in reviews of comparative effectiveness. AHRQ Publication No. 12-EHC110-EF. Agency for Healtcare Research and Quality. https:\/\/www.Effectivehealthcare.Ahrq.Gov\/Reports\/Final.Cfm.","journal-title":"AHRQ Publication No. 12-EHC110-EF. Agency for Healtcare Research and Quality"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_104_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0149206314527133"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_105_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/9781119536604.ch13"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_106_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.n71"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_107_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Page M. J. McKenzie J. E. Higgins J. P. T. (2018). Tools for assessing risk of reporting biases in studies and syntheses of studies: A systematic review. BMJ Open 3 Article e019703. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmjopen-2017-019703","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjopen-2017-019703"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_108_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.n160"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_109_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Page M. J. Sterne J. A. C. Boutron I. Hr\u00f3bjartsson A. Kirkham J. J. Li T. Lundh A. Mayo-Wilson E. McKenzie J. E. Stewart L. A. Sutton A. J. Bero L. Dunn A. G. Dwan K. Elbers R. G. Kanukula R. Meerpohl J. J. Turner E. H. Higgins J. P. T. (2023). ROB-ME: A tool for assessing risk of bias due to missing evidence in systematic reviews with meta-analysis. BMJ 383 Article e076754. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj-2023-076754","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj-2023-076754"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_110_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1240"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_111_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1217"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_112_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1302"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_113_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3102\/0013189X13507104"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_114_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1207"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_115_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/1745-6215-10-116"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_116_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ridd.2018.05.008"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_117_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1309"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_118_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/0470870168"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_119_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/s13643-020-01305-w"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_120_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.g6501"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_121_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1085"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_122_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1316"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_123_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1268"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_124_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2022.05.014"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_125_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1038\/s41562-022-01499-0"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_126_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjopen-2019-032497"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_127_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Silva S. Singh S. Kashif S. Ogilvie R. Pinto R. Z. Hayden J. A. (2024). Many randomized trials in a large systematic review were not registered and had evidence of selective outcome reporting: A metaepidemiological study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 176 Article 111568. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2024.111568","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2024.111568"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_128_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1223"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_129_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Smyth R. M. D. Kirkham J. J. Jacoby A. Altman D. G. Gamble C. Williamson P. R. (2011). Frequency and reasons for outcome reporting bias in clinical trials: Interviews with trialists. BMJ 342 Article c7153. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj.c7153","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.c7153"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_130_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1045"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_131_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2288-9-79"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_132_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3310\/hta14080"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_133_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s11121-021-01290-z"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_134_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Sterne J. A. Hern\u00e1n M. A. Reeves B. C. Savovi\u0107 J. Berkman N. D. Viswanathan M. Henry D. Altman D. G. Ansari M. T. Boutron I. Carpenter J. R. Chan A.-W. Churchill R. Deeks J. J. Hr\u00f3bjartsson A. Kirkham J. J\u00fcni P. Loke Y. K. Pigott T. D. Whiting P. F. (2016). ROBINS-I: A tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 355 Article i4919. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj.i4919","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.i4919"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_135_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Sterne J. A. C. Savovi\u0107 J. Page M. J. Elbers R. G. Blencowe N. S. Boutron I. Cates C. J. Cheng H.-Y. Corbett M. S. Eldridge S. M. Emberson J. R. Hern\u00e1n M. A. Hopewell S. Hr\u00f3bjartsson A. Junqueira D. R. J\u00fcni P. Kirkham J. J. Lasserson T. Li T. Whiting P. F. (2019). RoB 2: A revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 366 Article l4898. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj.l4898","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.l4898"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_136_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1215"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_137_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/s12874-021-01500-w"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_138_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/s41073-020-00092-1"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_139_1","article-title":"Methodological expectations of Campbell Collaboration intervention reviews: Conduct standards","author":"The Methods Group of the Campbell Collaboration","year":"2019","unstructured":"The Methods Group of the Campbell Collaboration. (2019a). Methodological expectations of Campbell Collaboration intervention reviews: Conduct standards. Campbell Policies and Guidelines Series No. 4. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.4073\/cpg.2016.3","journal-title":"Campbell Policies and Guidelines Series No. 4"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_140_1","article-title":"Methodological expectations of Campbell collaboration intervention reviews: Reporting standards","author":"The Methods Group of the Campbell Collaboration","year":"2019","unstructured":"The Methods Group of the Campbell Collaboration. (2019b). Methodological expectations of Campbell collaboration intervention reviews: Reporting standards. Campbell Policies and Guidelines Series No. 4. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.4073\/cpg.2016.4","journal-title":"Campbell Policies and Guidelines Series No. 4"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_141_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2023.01.011"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_142_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3102\/1076998609346961"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_143_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/s40795-017-0167-x"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_144_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2014.11.019"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_145_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/1049731504265834"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_146_1","volume-title":"Comparative assessment of Cochrane\u2019s ROB and ROB2 in dentistry trials: A meta-research study","author":"Viana J.","year":"2025","unstructured":"Viana J., Machado V., Proen\u00e7a L., Chambrone L., Botelho J. (2025). Comparative assessment of Cochrane\u2019s ROB and ROB2 in dentistry trials: A meta-research study. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.20944\/preprints202501.0209.v1"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_147_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2017.02.015"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_148_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/19439342.2012.711765"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_149_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/1745691612463078"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_150_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1134"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_151_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/1049731508317278"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_152_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1151"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_153_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1243"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_154_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1244"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_155_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1174"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_156_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1432"},{"key":"e_1_3_5_157_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cl2.1266"}],"container-title":["Campbell Systematic Reviews: Better Evidence for a Better World"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1177\/18911803261435892","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/full-xml\/10.1177\/18911803261435892","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1177\/18911803261435892","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,30]],"date-time":"2026-06-30T19:41:37Z","timestamp":1782848497000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/10.1177\/18911803261435892"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,5]]},"references-count":156,"journal-issue":{"issue":"2","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,6]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1177\/18911803261435892"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/18911803261435892","relation":{},"ISSN":["1891-1803","1891-1803"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1891-1803","type":"print"},{"value":"1891-1803","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,5]]},"article-number":"18911803261435892"}}