this is for holding javascript data
Chelsea Koller added Once_data_was_extracted_more__.tex
almost 9 years ago
Commit id: f67b3ca76f6170977eb971b124200258e8775a47
deletions | additions
diff --git a/Once_data_was_extracted_more__.tex b/Once_data_was_extracted_more__.tex
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fd75fa7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Once_data_was_extracted_more__.tex
...
Once data was extracted, more than 81 percent of all the abstracts did not mention any quality or risk of bias assessments (Figure 6), even though 50 percent of the articles assessed study quality or risk of bias in the methods of their articles (Sarah). Twenty-five abstracts (14 percent) mentioned quality assessment, and eight abstracts (4 percent) mentioned a risk of bias. Only one abstract (1 percent) mentioned the use of both assessments in their abstract.
As far as quality and risk of bias assessment across the three journals, Clinical Cancer Research only mentioned quality assessment or had no assessment at all (Figure 18). The Journal of Clinical Oncology mentioned either quality or risk of bias or nothing at all, and abstracts from The Lancet Oncology were the only abstracts to mention both quality and risk of bias assessments.
