Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2)
SHORT VERSION (CRIBSHEET)
Edited by Julian PT Higgins, Jelena Savović, Matthew J Page, Jonathan AC Sterne
on behalf of the RoB 2 Development Group
Version of 22 August 2019
The development of the RoB 2 tool was supported by the MRC Network of Hubs for Trials Methodology Research (MR/L004933/2- N61), with the support of the
host MRC ConDuCT-II Hub (Collaboration and innovation for Difficult and Complex randomised controlled Trials In Invasive procedures - MR/K025643/1), by MRC
research grant MR/M025209/1, and by a grant from The Cochrane Collaboration.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
1
,Preliminary considerations
Study design
Individually-randomized parallel-group trial
Cluster-randomized parallel-group trial
Individually randomized cross-over (or other matched) trial
For the purposes of this assessment, the interventions being compared are defined as
Experimental: Comparator:
Specify which outcome is being assessed for risk of bias
Specify the numerical result being assessed. In case of multiple alternative
analyses being presented, specify the numeric result (e.g. RR = 1.52 (95% CI
0.83 to 2.77) and/or a reference (e.g. to a table, figure or paragraph) that
uniquely defines the result being assessed.
Is the review team’s aim for this result…?
to assess the effect of assignment to intervention (the ‘intention-to-treat’ effect)
to assess the effect of adhering to intervention (the ‘per-protocol’ effect)
If the aim is to assess the effect of adhering to intervention, select the deviations from intended intervention that should be addressed (at least one must be
checked):
occurrence of non-protocol interventions
failures in implementing the intervention that could have affected the outcome
non-adherence to their assigned intervention by trial participants
2
, Which of the following sources were obtained to help inform the risk-of-bias assessment? (tick as many as apply)
Journal article(s)
Trial protocol
Statistical analysis plan (SAP)
Non-commercial trial registry record (e.g. ClinicalTrials.gov record)
Company-owned trial registry record (e.g. GSK Clinical Study Register record)
“Grey literature” (e.g. unpublished thesis)
Conference abstract(s) about the trial
Regulatory document (e.g. Clinical Study Report, Drug Approval Package)
Research ethics application
Grant database summary (e.g. NIH RePORTER or Research Councils UK Gateway to Research)
Personal communication with trialist
Personal communication with the sponsor
3
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through EFT, credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying this summary from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller PREMIERGRADES. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy this summary for R75,08. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
