Skip to main content

Table 3 Risk of bias assessments from individual trials extracted from published Cochrane reviews

From: Nudge strategies to improve healthcare providers’ implementation of evidence-based guidelines, policies and practices: a systematic review of trials included within Cochrane systematic reviews

Author name, year, study design, country

Random sequence generation

Allocation concealment

Protection against contamination

Baseline outcomes similar

Baseline characteristics similar

Blinding of outcome assessment

Incomplete outcome data

Selective reporting

Other bias

Baer 2016, cluster RCT, USA

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Not assessed

Not assessed

High risk

High risk

High risk

Unclear risk

Barnett 1983, RCT, USA

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

High risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Burack 1996, RCT, USA

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

High risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Chambers 1989, RCT, USA

Low risk

Unclear risk

High risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Chambers 1991, cluster RCT, USA

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Cranney 2008, cluster RCT, Canada

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Daucourt 2003, cluster RCT, France

Low risk

Low risk

Not assessed

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Dey, 2004, cluster RCT, England

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

High risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Eccles, 2001, RCT, England

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Engers, 2005, cluster RCT, Denmark

Low risk

High risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

High risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

High risk

Feldstein 2006, RCT, USA

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Fisher 2013, RCT, Singapore

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

High risk

High risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Goodfellow 2016, cluster RCT, England

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Not assessed

Grant 2011, RCT, USA

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Ince 2015, RCT, England

Low risk

Low risk

Not assessed

Not assessed

Not assessed

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

King 2016, RCT, USA

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Lafata 2007, cluster RCT, USA

High risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

High risk

High risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Le Breton, 2016, cluster RCT, France

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Leslie 2012; RCT; Canada

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Lobach, 1997, RCT, USA

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Majumdar 2007, RCT, Canada

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Majumdar 2008, RCT, Canada

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Martin Madrazo 2012, cluster RCT, Spain

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

McAlister, 2006, RCT, Canada

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Mertz 2010, cluster RCT, Canada

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

Low risk

High risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

Munoz-Price 2014, cross-over RCT, USA

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

High risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Rahme 2005, cluster RCT, Canada

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Robling 2002, cluster RCT, England

High risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Rodriguez 2015, cluster RCT, Argentina

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Rogers 1982, RCT, USA

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

High risk

High risk

Not assessed

Rossi 1997, cluster RCT, USA

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

High risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Roux, 2013, RCT, Canada

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

High risk

High risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Schnoor 2010, RCT, Germany

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

High risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

High risk

Schouten 2007, cluster RCT, Netherlands

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Shah 2014, cluster RCT, Canada

Low risk

Low risk

Not assessed

Low risk

High risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

Shojania 1998, RCT, USA

Unclear risk

High risk

High risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

High risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

Solomon 2007, cluster RCT, USA

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Solomon 2001, RCT, USA

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Stewardson 2016, cluster RCT, Switzerland

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

High risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Taveras 2015, cluster RCT, USA

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

Not assessed

Thompson 2008, cluster RCT, England

Low risk

Low risk

Not assessed

Not assessed

Not assessed

Unclear risk

Low risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Yeung 2011, cluster RCT, Hong Kong

Unclear risk

Low risk

Unclear risk

Low risk

High risk

High risk

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

  1. Risk of bias was assessed for the primary implementation outcome where specified
  2. Note: Not assessed refers to where the risk of bias criteria were not assessed in the Cochrane review in which they were identified