Ognjen Barcot

Dr. Ognjen Barcot

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

20Years (2007-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 February 2019 in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
IPIvana Propadalo
Ivana Propadalo
MTMia Tranfic
Mia Tranfic
IVIvana Vuka
Ivana Vuka
OBOgnjen Barcot
Ognjen Barcot
Tina Poklepović PeričićTina Poklepović Peričić
Tina Poklepović Peričić
LPLivia Puljak
Livia Puljak

5 August 2019 in BMC Medical Research Methodology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
OBOgnjen Barcot
Ognjen Barcot
MBMatija Boric
Matija Boric
Tina Poklepović PeričićTina Poklepović Peričić
Tina Poklepović Peričić
MCMarija Cavar
Marija Cavar
SDSvjetlana Došenović
Svjetlana Došenović
LPLivia Puljak
Livia Puljak
Assessing the risk of bias (RoB) in included studies is one of the key methodological aspects of systematic reviews. Cochrane systematic reviews appraise RoB of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with the Cochrane RoB tool. Detailed instructions for using the Cochrane RoB tool are provided in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (The Cochrane Handbook). The purpose of this study was to analyse whether Cochrane authors use adequate judgments about the RoB for random sequence generation of RCTs included in Cochrane reviews. We extracted authors’ judgments (high, low or unclear RoB) and supports for judgments (comments accompanying judgments which explain the rationale for a judgment) for random sequence generation of included RCTs from RoB tables of Cochrane reviews using automated data scraping. We categorised all supporting comments, analysed the number and type of various supporting comments and assessed adequacy of RoB judgment for randomisation in line with recommendations from the Cochrane Handbook. We analysed 10,103 RCTs that were included in 704 Cochrane reviews. For 5,706 RCTs, randomisation was not described, but for the remaining RCTs, it was indicated that randomisation was performed using computer/software/internet (N = 2,850), random number table (N = 883), mechanical method (N = 359) or it was incomplete/inappropriate (N = 305). Overall, 1,220/10,103 trials (12%) did not have a RoB judgment in line with Cochrane Handbook guidance about randomisation. The highest proportion of misjudgements was found for trials with high RoB (28%), followed by those with low (20%) or unclear (3%). Therefore, one in eight judgments for the analysed domain in Cochrane reviews was not in line with Cochrane Handbook, and one in four if the judgment was "high risk". Authors of Cochrane reviews often make judgments about the RoB related to random sequence generation that are not in line with instructions given in the Cochrane Handbook, which compromises the reliability of the systematic reviews. Our results can help authors of both Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews which use Cochrane RoB tool to avoid making common mistakes when assessing RoB in included trials.

23 January 2024 in Research Synthesis Methods
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ABAndrija Babić
Andrija Babić
OBOgnjen Barcot
Ognjen Barcot
TVTomislav Visković
Tomislav Visković
FŠFrano Šarić
Frano Šarić
AKAleksandar Kirkovski
Aleksandar Kirkovski
LPLivia Puljak
Livia Puljak

1 July 2020 in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
LPLivia Puljak
Livia Puljak
IRIrma Ramic
Irma Ramic
CNCoral Arriola Naharro
Coral Arriola Naharro
JBJana Brezova
Jana Brezova
YLYi-Chen Lin
Yi-Chen Lin
MSMaria Suarez Salvado
Maria Suarez Salvado

1 August 2019 in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
FSFrano Saric
Frano Saric
OBOgnjen Barcot
Ognjen Barcot
LPLivia Puljak
Livia Puljak

1 April 2020 in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
NKNadja Könsgen
Nadja Könsgen
OBOgnjen Barcot
Ognjen Barcot
SHSimone Heß
Simone Heß
LPLivia Puljak
Livia Puljak
KGKäthe Goossen
Käthe Goossen
DPDawid Pieper
Dawid Pieper