ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions

# ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions > OpenAlex Metadata Hub · https://openalex.org/W2531269403 ## Bibliographic - **DOI:** 10.1136/bmj.i4919 - **Year:** 2016 - **Citations:** 19187 - **Open Access:** Yes (hybrid) - **License:** cc-by-nc - **Source:** https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/355/bmj.i4919.full.pdf ## Authors - Jonathan A C Sterne - Miguel A. Hernán - Barnaby C Reeves - Jelena Savović - Nancy D Berkman - Meera Viswanathan - David Henry - Douglas G. Altman - Mohammed Ansari - Isabelle Boutron - James R. Carpenter - An‐Wen Chan - Rachel Churchill - Jonathan J Deeks - Asbjørn Hróbjartsson - Jamie J Kirkham - Peter Jüni - Yoon K. Loke - Theresa D Pigott - Craig Ramsay - Deborah L. Regidor - Hannah R. Rothstein - Lakhbir Sandhu - Pasqualina Santaguida - Holger J. Schünemann - Beverly Shea - Ian Shrier - Peter Tugwell - Lucy Turner - Jeffrey C. Valentine - Hugh Waddington - Elizabeth Waters - George A. Wells - Penny Whiting - Julian P. T. Higgins ## Abstract Non-randomised studies of the effects of interventions are critical to many areas of healthcare evaluation, but their results may be biased. It is therefore important to understand and appraise their strengths and weaknesses. We developed ROBINS-I (“Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions”), a new tool for evaluating risk of bias in estimates of the comparative effectiveness (harm or benefit) of interventions from studies that did not use randomisation to allocate units (individuals or clusters of individuals) to comparison groups. The tool will be particularly useful to those undertaking systematic reviews that include non-randomised studies. ## Keywords Psychological intervention, Medicine, Strengths and weaknesses, Systematic review, Harm, Meta-analysis, MEDLINE, Psychology, Nursing, Pathology, Social psychology ## Concepts - Psychological intervention - Medicine - Strengths and weaknesses - Systematic review - Harm - Meta-analysis - MEDLINE - Psychology - Nursing - Pathology - Social psychology - Political science - Law --- *Metadata only — full text not imported unless Open Access license permits.*

Bài “ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions” được TradingBase chuyển thành Knowledge Product cho trader — không phải trang đọc abstract OpenAlex. Tóm lược học thuật (đã diễn giải): Non-randomised studies of the effects of interventions are critical to many areas of healthcare evaluation, but their results may be biased. It is therefore important to understand and appraise their strengths and weaknesses. We developed ROBINS-I (“Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions”), a new tool for evaluating risk of bias in estimates of the comparative effectiveness (harm or benefit) of interventions from studies that did not use randomisation to allocate units (individuals or clusters of individuals) to comparison groups. The tool will be particularly useful to those undertaking systematic reviews that include non-randomised studies. Phần Trading Insights bên dưới nối nghiên cứu với Forex, vàng, USD, lãi suất và risk regime — để bạn đưa vào journal và playbook. Metadata DOI/OA chỉ là rail tham chiếu; nội dung chính là summary, takeaways và ứng dụng thị trường do Content Factory sinh.