Despite a major increase in the range and number of software offerings now available to
help researchers produce evidence syntheses, there is currently no generic tool for …

The field of evidence synthesis is growing rapidly, with a corresponding increase in the
number of software tools and workflows to support the construction of systematic reviews …

A key step in the systematic review process is the assessment of the methodological quality
(or risk of bias) of the included studies. At JBI, we have developed several tools to assist with …

Background Overviews of systematic reviews (SRs) attempt to systematically retrieve and
summarise the results of multiple systematic reviews. This is the second of two papers from a …

Evidence synthesis findings depend on the assumption that the included studies follow good
clinical practice and results are not fabricated or false. Studies which are problematic due to …

The trustworthiness of individual studies is routinely characterized in systemic reviews by
evaluating risk of bias, often by mechanistically applying standardized algorithms. However …

Background Several scales, checklists and domain-based tools for assessing risk of
reporting biases exist, but it is unclear how much they vary in content and guidance. We …

Background Machine learning and automation are increasingly used to make the evidence
synthesis process faster and more responsive to policymakers' needs. In systematic reviews …

Background Different tools exist for assessing risk of bias of intervention studies for
systematic reviews. We present a tool for assessing risk of bias across both randomized and …

JBI recently began the process of updating and revising its suite of critical appraisal tools to
ensure that these tools remain compatible with recent developments within risk of bias …