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.

78,904 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. 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. (Abstract)

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 Controlled trial quality: uncertain

2. A mathematical model of case-ascertainment bias: Applied to case-control studies nested within a randomized screening trial. Full Text available with Trip Pro

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

2018 PLoS ONE

3. 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) Full Text available with Trip Pro

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

2017 Trials Controlled trial quality: predicted high

4. The WISDOM Personalized Breast Cancer Screening Trial: Simulation Study to Assess Potential Bias and Analytic Approaches. Full Text available with Trip Pro

The WISDOM Personalized Breast Cancer Screening Trial: Simulation Study to Assess Potential Bias and Analytic Approaches. WISDOM (Women Informed to Screen Depending on Measures of Risk) is a randomized trial to assess whether personalized breast cancer screening-where women are screened biannually, annually, biennially, or not at all depending on risk and age-can prevent as many advanced (stage IIB or higher) cancers as annual screening in women ages 40-74 years across 5 years of trial time (...) with the hazard rate based on the risk stratum. Results from the virtual trials were used to evaluate two candidate analysis strategies with respect to susceptibility for introducing bias: 1) difference between arms in total number of events over total trial time, and 2) difference in number of events within complete screening cycles.Based on the simulations, about 86 stage IIB or higher cancers will be detected within the trial and the total exposure time will be about 74 000 years in each arm. Potential

2018 Jnci Cancer Spectrum Controlled trial quality: uncertain

5. Bias in dyslexia screening in a Dutch multicultural population Full Text available with Trip Pro

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

2018 Annals of dyslexia

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

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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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

12. Covid-19: Infrared Temperature Screening to Identify Potentially Infected Staff or Visitors Presenting to Healthcare Facilities during Infectious Disease Outbreaks

Covid-19: Infrared Temperature Screening to Identify Potentially Infected Staff or Visitors Presenting to Healthcare Facilities during Infectious Disease Outbreaks CLINICAL EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT Share Your Feedback on how this report answered your question by visiting ly.ecri.org/rate © March 2020 ECRI Infrared Temperature Screening to Identify Potentially Infected Staff or Visitors Presenting to Healthcare Facilities during Infectious Disease Outbreaks Temperature monitoring during infectious (...) disease outbreaks has become commonplace, and various monitoring approaches have been taken at public entry points such as health systems and airports. A common method has been the use of external infrared (IR) temperature screening devices with or without questionnaires for visitors and staff entering healthcare facilities to identify those who may have potentially infectious disease and prevent their entry into the facility. This report focuses on the accuracy of these systems for identifying

2020 Covid-19 Ad hoc papers

13. Identification and correction of spatial bias are essential for obtaining quality data in high-throughput screening technologies Full Text available with Trip Pro

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.

2017 Scientific reports

14. Accuracy of visual cervical screening: Verification bias revisited. Full Text available with Trip Pro

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

2017 BJOG

15. Best practice to identify and prevent cognitive bias in clinical decision-making

in the hospital setting. Peer reviewed and grey literature were included if published in English from 2014 to present. A search of Google and Medline was undertaken using a combination of relevant search terms including cognitive bias, management, reduction and prevention. Search results were screened by one reviewer in consultation with colleagues as necessary. Results. This literature review identified three systematic reviews [1-3] and one RCT [4]. An additional four narrative reviews were included (...) Best practice to identify and prevent cognitive bias in clinical decision-making Cognitive Bias 1 Best practice to identify and prevent cognitive bias in clinical decision-making Citation Garrubba M, Joseph C. & Melder A. 2019. Best practice to identify and prevent cognitive bias in clinical decision-making: Scoping review. Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Innovation and Quality, Monash Health, Melbourne, Australia. Summary about evidence of best practice This review reports

2019 Monash Health Evidence Reviews

16. Newborn screening for sickle cell disease

of affected children, there is a hint of benefit in favour of newborn screening for SCD, if followed by further interventions such as education of family members and infection prevention, in comparison with no screening. This hint of benefit is based on 1 retrospective, historical-comparative screening study showing a dramatically high effect of the intervention, despite being associated with a high risk of bias regarding the results. No ongoing studies on the screening chain were found. To answer (...) 2007 ? ? - ? data on probability of survival reported and usable ? data reported, but not usable for the benefit assessment - outcome not surveyed 4.2.3 Assessment of the risk of bias at study and outcome levels The comparative study of the screening chain (King 2007) was assessed as being associated with a high risk of bias. This was due to the historic control group and the lack of confounder control. Data were collected retrospectively from clinical practice; therefore, lack of blinding must

2019 Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Healthcare (IQWiG)

17. Prehospital stroke scales as screening tools for early identification of stroke and transient ischemic attack. (Abstract)

Prehospital stroke scales as screening tools for early identification of stroke and transient ischemic attack. Rapid and accurate detection of stroke by paramedics or other emergency clinicians at the time of first contact is crucial for timely initiation of appropriate treatment. Several stroke recognition scales have been developed to support the initial triage. However, their accuracy remains uncertain and there is no agreement which of the scales perform better.To systematically identify (...) and review the evidence pertaining to the test accuracy of validated stroke recognition scales, as used in a prehospital or emergency room (ER) setting to screen people suspected of having stroke.We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid) and the Science Citation Index to 30 January 2018. We handsearched the reference lists of all included studies and other relevant publications and contacted experts in the field to identify additional studies or unpublished data.We included studies evaluating

2019 Cochrane

18. Screening hysteroscopy in subfertile women and women undergoing assisted reproduction. (Abstract)

in subfertile women wishing to conceive spontaneously, or before undergoing IUI or IVF.We independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. The primary outcomes were live birth rate and complications following hysteroscopy. We analysed data using risk ratio (RR) and a fixed-effect model. We assessed the quality of the evidence by using GRADE criteria.We retrieved 11 studies. We included one trial that evaluated screening hysteroscopy versus no hysteroscopy, in women (...) women who had no hysteroscopy prior to IVF. Main limitations in the quality of evidence were inadequate reporting of study methods and higher statistical heterogeneity. Eight of the ten trials had unclear risk of bias for allocation concealment.Performing a screening hysteroscopy before IVF may increase live birth rate (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.43; 6 RCTs; participants = 2745; I² = 69 %; low-quality evidence). For a typical clinic with a 22% live birth rate, performing a screening hysteroscopy

2019 Cochrane

19. School dental screening programmes for oral health. (Abstract)

were based in India and one in the USA. We assessed two trials to be at low risk of bias, two trials to be at high risk of bias and three trials to be at unclear risk of bias.None of the trials had long-term follow-up to ascertain the lasting effects of school dental screening.None of the trials reported the proportion of children with untreated caries or other oral diseases, cost effectiveness or adverse events.Four trials evaluated traditional screening versus no screening. We performed a meta (...) -sense model of self-regulation (a theoretical framework that explains how people understand and respond to threats to their health), with or without a dental information guide, compared to a standard referral letter. The findings were inconclusive. Due to high risk of bias, indirectness and imprecision, we assessed the evidence as very low certainty.The trials included in this review evaluated short-term effects of screening. We found very low-certainty evidence that is insufficient to allow us

2019 Cochrane

20. Prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test Full Text available with Trip Pro

difference The panel found that these differences were not important for most patients, because the intervention effects were negligible and/or very imprecise (such as statistically not significant) No important difference All cause mortality Moderate More 129 128 Risk of Bias Serious Imprecision No serious concerns Indirectness No serious concerns Inconsistency No serious concerns Publication bias No serious concerns PSA screening probably has little or no effect on all cause mortality No important (...) difference Prostate cancer mortality Low More 3 3 Risk of Bias Serious Imprecision No serious concerns Indirectness No serious concerns Inconsistency Serious Publication bias No serious concerns PSA screening may have little or no effect on prostate cancer mortality 7 fewer Incidence of cancer (any stage) Low More 32 39 Risk of Bias Serious Imprecision Because of inconsistency Indirectness No serious concerns Inconsistency Serious Publication bias No serious concerns PSA screening may increase

2018 BMJ Rapid Recommendations

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