'Awesome' shouldn't mean a trial design with a high risk of bias, with results then promoted to the media using excited anecdotes & no explanation of the high risk of bias. The difficulty of blinding doesn't make results any more reliable. I linked to CBT trial with placebo arm.
Apologies, I'm getting confused with the new tool. The answer would be that they used patient-reported outcomes, but whether that indicates a high risk of bias is a judgement call, and I'd say no in this case due to the things I've mentioned
-
-
"Is it likely that assessment of the outcome was influenced by knowledge of intervention received?" with patient-reported symptoms in trials of homeopathy given as example of 'yes', & you'd answer 'no' for this CBT trial relying on subjective self-report? I don't understand why.
-
re multiple subjective self-report outcomes: Problems with bias are observed on a wide range of different kinds of self-report measures and they generally operate in the same direction across all types of self-report measures, eg: https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/43/4/1272/2952051 …
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.