How to Trip Rapid Review

Step 1: Select articles relevant to your search (remember the system is only optimised for single intervention studies)

Step 2: press

Step 3: review the result, and maybe amend the or if you know better! If we're unsure of the overall sentiment of the trial we will display the conclusion under the article title. We then require you to tell us what the correct sentiment is.

60,107 results for

Screening Bias

by
...
Latest & greatest
Alerts

Export results

Use check boxes to select individual results below

SmartSearch available

Trip's SmartSearch engine has discovered connected searches & results. Click to show

1. Applying quantitative bias analysis to estimate the plausible effects of selection bias in a cluster randomised controlled trial: secondary analysis of the Primary care Osteoarthritis Screening Trial (POST) (PubMed)

Applying quantitative bias analysis to estimate the plausible effects of selection bias in a cluster randomised controlled trial: secondary analysis of the Primary care Osteoarthritis Screening Trial (POST) Selection bias is a concern when designing cluster randomised controlled trials (c-RCT). Despite addressing potential issues at the design stage, bias cannot always be eradicated from a trial design. The application of bias analysis presents an important step forward in evaluating whether (...) trial findings are credible. The aim of this paper is to give an example of the technique to quantify potential selection bias in c-RCTs.This analysis uses data from the Primary care Osteoarthritis Screening Trial (POST). The primary aim of this trial was to test whether screening for anxiety and depression, and providing appropriate care for patients consulting their GP with osteoarthritis would improve clinical outcomes. Quantitative bias analysis is a seldom-used technique that can quantify types

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2017 Trials

2. A mathematical model of case-ascertainment bias: Applied to case-control studies nested within a randomized screening trial. (PubMed)

A mathematical model of case-ascertainment bias: Applied to case-control studies nested within a randomized screening trial. When some individuals are screen-detected before the beginning of the study, but otherwise would have been diagnosed symptomatically during the study, this results in different case-ascertainment probabilities among screened and unscreened participants, referred to here as lead-time-biased case-ascertainment (LTBCA). In fact, this issue can arise even in risk-factor (...) studies nested within a randomized screening trial; even though the screening intervention is randomly allocated to trial arms, there is no randomization to potential risk-factors and uptake of screening can differ by risk-factor strata. Under the assumptions that neither screening nor the risk factor affects underlying incidence and no other forms of bias operate, we simulate and compare the underlying cumulative incidence and that observed in the study due to LTBCA. The example used

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2018 PLoS ONE

3. Bias-corrected estimates of effects of PSA screening decisions on the risk of prostate cancer diagnosis and death: Analysis of the Finnish randomized study of screening for prostate cancer. (PubMed)

Bias-corrected estimates of effects of PSA screening decisions on the risk of prostate cancer diagnosis and death: Analysis of the Finnish randomized study of screening for prostate cancer. More information is needed about effects of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for informed decision making. The objective of our study is to evaluate the effects of an implemented screening decision on the risk of prostate cancer (PC) diagnosis and PC death. In a randomized trial, 31,867 Finnish men (...) aged 55-67 years were allocated to the screening arm and 48,282 to the control arm during 1996-1999. Two to three screening rounds were offered to the screening arm with a PSA cut-off of 4.0 ng/ml. A counterfactual exclusion method was used to adjust for the effects of screening noncompliance and PSA contamination on risk of PC death and PC incidence by prognostic group at 15 years of follow up. After correcting for noncompliance and contamination, PSA screening led to 32.4 (95% CI 26.4, 38.6) more

2019 International journal of cancer

4. Diagnostic suspicion bias

are investigated, which can affect rates of diagnosis. This can be termed diagnostic suspicion bias. Example As an example, if a group of workers in the industry find out that one of the chemicals they have been exposed to is a carcinogen, then these workers might present to a medical facility sooner, or be more likely to attend screening, Also, medical staff might more readily suspect these individuals than others to have cancer, because of the knowledge of their exposure to the carcinogen, and this might (...) Diagnostic suspicion bias Diagnostic suspicion bias - Catalog of Bias Catalogue of Bias Navigate this website Diagnostic suspicion bias Knowledge of a subject’s prior exposures or personal biases may influence both the process and the outcome of diagnostic tests. Table of Contents Background Information about a group or individual coupled with suspicions or prejudices of medical staff could influence how diagnoses are made, by affecting what examinations are performed and how quickly people

2018 Catalogue of Bias

5. Detection bias

be higher among women taking statins and lower among women taking antibiotics than a comparison group of women not taking these treatments. In a , there were systematic differences in how much screening the women received, depending on which medicines they were taking. This meant that any associations observed might be affected by detection bias. A and risks of basal cell or squamous cell cancer found that current smokers had significantly lower risks of basal cell carcinoma, but higher risks (...) Detection bias Detection bias - Catalog of Bias Catalogue of Bias Navigate this website Detection bias S ystematic differences between groups in how outcomes are determined . Table of Contents Background A test or treatment for a disease may perform differently according to some characteristic of the study participant, which itself may influence the likelihood of disease detection or the effectiveness of the treatment. Detection bias can occur in trials when groups differ in the way outcome

2018 Catalogue of Bias

6. Ascertainment bias

Ascertainment bias Ascertainment bias - Catalog of Bias Catalogue of Bias Navigate this website Ascertainment bias Systematic differences in the identification of individuals included in a study or distortion in the collection of data in a study. Table of Contents Background Ascertainment bias arises when data for a study or analysis is collected (or surveyed, screened, or recorded) such that some members of the intended population are less likely to be included than others. The resulting study (...) sample becomes biased, as it is systematically different from the intended population. Ascertainment bias is related to sampling and selection bias. It can happen when there is more intense surveillance or screening for the outcome among exposed individuals than among unexposed individuals, or differential recording of the outcome. Ascertainment bias can occur in screening, where take-up can be influenced by factors such as cultural differences. It can occur in case-control studies in the initial

2018 Catalogue of Bias

7. Selection bias

cohort studies found that the presence of selection bias overestimated survival by as much as 100%. Preventive steps To assess the probable degree of selection bias, authors should include the following information at different stages of the trial or study: – Numbers of participants screened as well as randomised/included. – How intervention/exposure groups compared at baseline. – To what extent potential participants were re-screened. – Exactly what procedures were put in place to prevent prediction (...) Selection bias Selection bias - Catalog of Bias Catalogue of Bias Navigate this website Selection bias occurs when individuals or groups in a study differ systematically from the population of interest leading to a systematic error in an association or outcome. Table of Contents Background Participants in research may differ systematically from the population of interest. For example, participants included in an influenza vaccine trial may be healthy young adults, whereas those who are most

2018 Catalogue of Bias

8. Verification bias

verification bias was also higher (0.96 vs.0.88). The authors concluded that the test may not be may not be sufficiently sensitive to act as an effective screening test for colorectal cancer. Preventive steps Preventive steps Ideally, in a diagnostic accuracy study, all patients should receive the same reference test. However, obtaining a reference test in every patient may not be ethical, practical, or cost effective, which can lead to verification bias. One way to reduce verification bias in clinical (...) Verification bias Verification bias - Catalog of Bias Catalogue of Bias Navigate this website Verification bias when only a proportion of the study group receives confirmation of the diagnosis by the reference standard, or if some patients receive a different reference standard at the time of diagnosis. Table of Contents Background Verification bias (sometimes referred to as “work-up bias”) occurs during investigations of diagnostic test accuracy when there is a difference in testing strategy

2018 Catalogue of Bias

9. A cohort study of mammography screening finds that comorbidity measures are insufficient for controlling selection bias. (PubMed)

A cohort study of mammography screening finds that comorbidity measures are insufficient for controlling selection bias. To examine the potential of claims-based comorbidity measures for controlling selection bias in observational studies of mammography screening.Based on claims data of a large German Statutory Health Insurance fund, the single comorbidities considered by the Charlson, Elixhauser, Multipurpose Australian Comorbidity Scoring System, and M3 comorbidity measures were identified (...) . The unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for death from any cause for participants vs. nonparticipants was 0.44 (99.9% confidence interval 0.42-0.46). Adjustments attenuated the HR to a maximum of 0.52 (0.50-0.54).The lower short-term all-cause mortality among participants cannot be explained by mammography screening effects and should be interpreted as selection bias. Adjusting for comorbidities only slightly attenuated this bias. Future studies should examine whether claims data include further information

2018 Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

10. Bias in dyslexia screening in a Dutch multicultural population (PubMed)

Bias in dyslexia screening in a Dutch multicultural population We set out to address the adequacy of dyslexia screening in Dutch and non-western immigrant children, using the Dutch Dyslexia Screening Test (DST-NL) and outcomes of the Dutch dyslexia protocol, both of which are susceptible to cultural bias. Using the protocol as standard, we conducted an ROC (Receiver Operating Characteristics) analysis in Dutch and immigrant third, fifth, and seventh graders, combining a cross-sectional (...) predictors of subtest performance. In a second analysis, Word Lexicon was added as a proxy of knowledge of the Dutch language and culture. After controlling for Word Lexicon, cultural background became significant for most subtests, suggesting the presence of cultural bias. Subtests assessing technical literacy, such as One-Minute-Reading, Non-Word-Reading, One-Minute-Writing, or Two-Minutes-Spelling, showed more convergence between the two assessments. Less-effective subtests were Naming Pictures

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2018 Annals of dyslexia

11. Accuracy of visual cervical screening: Verification bias revisited. (PubMed)

Accuracy of visual cervical screening: Verification bias revisited. 28646576 2019 02 15 2019 02 15 1471-0528 125 5 2018 04 BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology BJOG Accuracy of visual cervical screening: verification bias revisited. 554 10.1111/1471-0528.14797 Wentzensen N N Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA. Litwin T T Cancer Prevention Fellowship Program, Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute (...) , Rockville, MD, USA. eng ZIA CP010124-16 NULL International ZIA CP010124-16 ImNIH Intramural NIH HHS United States Journal Article Comment 2017 08 02 England BJOG 100935741 1470-0328 9679TC07X4 Iodine Q40Q9N063P Acetic Acid AIM IM BJOG. 2018 Apr;125(5):545-553 28603909 Acetic Acid Bias Iodine Mass Screening Vaginal Smears 2019 04 01 2017 6 25 6 0 2019 2 16 6 0 2017 6 25 6 0 ppublish 28646576 10.1111/1471-0528.14797 PMC5742307 NIHMS887534

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2017 BJOG

12. Risk of Bias from Inclusion of Currently Diagnosed or Treated Patients in Studies of Depression Screening Tool Accuracy: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Recently Published Primary Studies and Meta-Analyses. (PubMed)

Risk of Bias from Inclusion of Currently Diagnosed or Treated Patients in Studies of Depression Screening Tool Accuracy: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Recently Published Primary Studies and Meta-Analyses. Depression screening can improve upon usual care only if screening tools accurately identify depressed patients who would not otherwise be recognized by healthcare providers. Inclusion of patients already being treated for depression in studies of screening tool accuracy would inflate (...) estimates of screening accuracy and yield. The present study investigated (1) the proportion of primary studies of depression screening tool accuracy that were recently published in journals listed in MEDLINE, which appropriately excluded currently diagnosed or treated patients; and (2) whether recently published meta-analyses identified the inclusion of currently diagnosed or treated patients as a potential source of bias.MEDLINE was searched from January 1, 2013 through March 27, 2015 for primary

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2017 PloS one

13. Identification and correction of spatial bias are essential for obtaining quality data in high-throughput screening technologies (PubMed)

Identification and correction of spatial bias are essential for obtaining quality data in high-throughput screening technologies Spatial bias continues to be a major challenge in high-throughput screening technologies. Its successful detection and elimination are critical for identifying the most promising drug candidates. Here, we examine experimental small molecule assays from the popular ChemBank database and show that screening data are widely affected by both assay-specific and plate (...) -specific spatial biases. Importantly, the bias affecting screening data can fit an additive or multiplicative model. We show that the use of appropriate statistical methods is essential for improving the quality of experimental screening data. The presented methodology can be recommended for the analysis of current and next-generation screening data.

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2017 Scientific reports

14. A Screen-Peck Task for Investigating Cognitive Bias in Laying Hens (PubMed)

A Screen-Peck Task for Investigating Cognitive Bias in Laying Hens Affect-induced cognitive judgement biases occur in both humans and animals. Animals in a more negative affective state tend to interpret ambiguous cues more negatively than animals in a more positive state and vice versa. Investigating animals' responses to ambiguous cues can therefore be used as a proxy measure of affective state. We investigated laying hens' responses to ambiguous stimuli using a novel cognitive bias task (...) . In the 'screen-peck' task, hens were trained to peck a high/low saturation orange circle presented on a computer screen (positive cue-P) to obtain a mealworm reward, and to not peck when the oppositely saturated orange circle was presented (negative cue-N) to avoid a one second air puff. Ambiguous cues were orange circles of intermediate saturation between the P and N cue (near-positive-NP; middle-M; near-negative-NN), and were unrewarded. Cue pecking showed a clear generalisation curve from P through NP, M

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2016 PloS one

15. Estimating bias in causes of death ascertainment in the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. (PubMed)

Estimating bias in causes of death ascertainment in the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. Precise cause of death (CoD) ascertainment is crucial in any cancer screening trial to avoid bias from misclassification due to excessive recording of diagnosed cancer as a CoD in death certificates instead of non-cancer disease that actually caused death. We estimated whether there was bias in CoD determination between screening (SA) and control arms (CA) in a population-based (...) prostate cancer (PCa) screening trial.Our trial is the largest component of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer with more than 80,000 men. Randomly selected deaths in men with PCa (N=442/2568 cases, 17.2%) were reviewed by an independent CoD committee. Median follow-up was 16.8 years in both arms.Overdiagnosis of PCa was present in the SA as the risk ratio for PCa incidence was 1.19 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14-1.24). The hazard ratio (HR) for PCa mortality was 0.94 (95

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2016 Cancer epidemiology

16. Screening Bias

Screening Bias Screening Bias Toggle navigation Brain Head & Neck Chest Endocrine Abdomen Musculoskeletal Skin Infectious Disease Hematology & Oncology Cohorts Diagnostics Emergency Findings Procedures Prevention & Management Pharmacy Resuscitation Trauma Emergency Procedures Ultrasound Cardiovascular Emergencies Lung Emergencies Infectious Disease Pediatrics Neurologic Emergencies Skin Exposure Miscellaneous Abuse Cancer Administration 4 Screening Bias Screening Bias Aka: Screening Bias (...) , Selection Bias From Related Chapters II. Definition Patient Selection Bias III. Example: Healthier Patients with lower overall mortality Study volunteers Patients who volunteer for screening IV. References Images: Related links to external sites (from Bing) These images are a random sampling from a Bing search on the term "Screening Bias." Click on the image (or right click) to open the source website in a new browser window. Related Studies (from Trip Database) Related Topics in Epidemiology About

2018 FP Notebook

17. Evaluation of cognitive impairment in elderly population with hypertension from a low-resource setting: Agreement and bias between screening tools (PubMed)

Evaluation of cognitive impairment in elderly population with hypertension from a low-resource setting: Agreement and bias between screening tools The evaluation of cognitive impairment in adulthood merits attention in societies in transition and especially in people with chronic diseases. Screening tools available for clinical practice and epidemiological studies have been designed in high-income but not in resource-constrained settings. The aim of this study was to assess the agreement (...) and bias of three common tools used for screening of cognitive impairment in people with hypertension: the modified Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and the Leganés Cognitive Test (LCT).A cross-sectional study enrolling participants with hypertension from a semi-urban area in Peru was performed. The three screening tools for cognitive impairment were applied on three consecutive days. The prevalence of cognitive impairment was calculated for each test

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2016 eNeurologicalSci

18. Gender-Bias Bias Part 2: Unpicking Cherry-Picking

Gender-Bias Bias Part 2: Unpicking Cherry-Picking Gender-Bias Bias Part 2: Unpicking Cherry-Picking | PLOS Blogs Network PLOS Blogs Staff Blogs Blogs by Topic Biology & Life Sciences Earth & Environmental Sciences Multi-disciplinary Sciences Medicine & Health Research Analysis & Scientific Policy Diverse perspectives on science and medicine Staff Blogs Blogs by Topic Biology & Life Sciences Earth & Environmental Sciences Multi-disciplinary Sciences Medicine & Health Research Analysis (...) & Scientific Policy Post navigation in Uncategorized Source: When you think about it, the possibilities for when you discuss research these days are growing in rather spectacular leaps and bounds, aren’t they? Questions, studies, specifics in the studies, interpretations, rationales, and theories: the internet and the explosion of research means there’s pretty much a bottomless supply of cherries. It makes discipline and rigor in minimizing research bias ever more critical – along with the ability to tell

2016 PLOS Blogs Network

19. Gender-Bias Bias Part 2: Unpicking Cherry-Picking

Gender-Bias Bias Part 2: Unpicking Cherry-Picking Gender-Bias Bias Part 2: Unpicking Cherry-Picking | Absolutely Maybe PLOS Blogs Staff Blogs Blogs by Topic Biology & Life Sciences Earth & Environmental Sciences Multi-disciplinary Sciences Medicine & Health Research Analysis & Scientific Policy Diverse perspectives on science and medicine Staff Blogs Blogs by Topic Biology & Life Sciences Earth & Environmental Sciences Multi-disciplinary Sciences Medicine & Health Research Analysis & Scientific (...) Policy Post navigation in When you think about it, the possibilities for when you discuss research these days are growing in rather spectacular leaps and bounds, aren’t they? Questions, studies, specifics in the studies, interpretations, rationales, and theories: the internet and the explosion of research means there’s pretty much a bottomless supply of cherries. It makes discipline and rigor in minimizing research bias ever more critical – along with the ability to tell a good cherry from one

2016 Absolutely Maybe

20. Systematic screening and assessment of psychosocial well-being and care needs of people with cancer. (PubMed)

, needs assessment, or assessment of biopsychosocial symptoms or overall well-being. In 13 studies, the screening was a self-reported questionnaire, while in the remaining 13 studies an interventionist conducted the screening by interview or paper-pencil assessment. The interventional screenings in the studies were applied 1 to 12 times, without follow-up or from 4 weeks to 18 months after the first interventional screening. We assessed risk of bias as high for eight RCTs, low for five RCTs (...) Systematic screening and assessment of psychosocial well-being and care needs of people with cancer. Receiving a diagnosis of cancer and the subsequent related treatments can have a significant impact on an individual's physical and psychosocial well-being. To ensure that cancer care addresses all aspects of well-being, systematic screening for distress and supportive care needs is recommended. Appropriate screening could help support the integration of psychosocial approaches in daily routines

2019 Cochrane

To help you find the content you need quickly, you can filter your results via the categories on the right-hand side >>>>