Skip to main content

Table 2 Assessment of risk of bias within and across included studies

From: Community-based management versus traditional hospitalization in treatment of drug-resistant tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Study

Study year

NOS/ STROBE score

GRADE

Allocation concealment (Selection bias)

Blinding

Incomplete outcome data

Random sequence generation

Selective outcome reporting

Other sources of bias

Cox H

2014

4/19

VL

N

Y

Y

N

Y

A

Brust JC

2012

4/19

VL

N

Y

N

N

N

A, D

Vaghela JF

2015

4/19

VL

N

Y

Y

N

Y

A, D

Oyieng’o D

2012

4/19

VL

N

Y

Y

N

N

A, D

Joseph P

2011

4/19

VL

N

Y

Y

N

N

A, D

Van Deun A

2010

5/20

L

N

Y

Y

N

Y

A, D

Brust JC

2010

5/20

L

N

Y

Y

N

Y

A, D

Singla R

2009

4/19

VL

N

Y

Y

N

Y

A, D

Tupasi TE

2006

4/19

VL

N

Y

Y

N

Y

A, D

Thomas A

2007

4/19

VL

N

Y

Y

N

Y

A, D

Liu CH

2011

5/20

L

N

Y

Y

N

Y

A, D

Keshavjee S

2008

5/20

L

N

Y

Y

N

Y

A, D

Shin SS

2007

5/19

L

N

Y

N

N

Y

A, D

Cox HS

2007

4/19

VL

N

Y

N

N

N

A,D

Wei XL

2015

4/19

VL

N

Y

Y

N

N

A,D

Hirpa S

2013

5/20

L

N

Y

N

N

N

A, D

  1. A Attrition bias, D Detection bias
  2. VL Very Low: We are very uncertain about the estimate
  3. L Low: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate
  4. H High: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect
  5. NOS score < 4: Low quality
  6. NOS score 4–5: Moderate quality
  7. Y: Low risk of bias
  8. N: High risk of bias