Risk of bias in exercise science: A systematic review of 340 studies

Nicholas Preobrazenski, Abby McCaig, Anna Turner, Maddy Kushner, Lauren Pacitti, Peter Mendolia, Ben Macdonald, Kristi Storoschuk, Tori Bouck, Youssef Zaza, Stephanie Lu,Brendon J. Gurd

ISCIENCE(2024)

引用 0|浏览1
暂无评分
摘要
Risk of bias can contribute to irreproducible science and mislead decision making. Analyses of smaller subsections of the exercise science literature suggest many exercise science studies have unclear or high risk of bias. The current review (osf.io/jznv8) assesses whether this unclear or high risk of bias is more widespread in the exercise science literature and whether this bias has decreased since the publication of the 1996 Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines. We report significant reductions in selection, performance, detection, and reporting biases in 2020 compared with 1995 in the 340 of 5,451 studies assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Despite these improvements, most 2020 studies still had unclear or high risks of bias. These results underscore the need for methodological vigilance, adherence to reporting standards, and education on experimental bias. Factors contributing to these improvements, such advancements in education and journal requirements, remain uncertain.
更多
查看译文
关键词
Subject areas,bias,exercise,exercise science,CONSORT,Cochrane
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要