Skip to main content

Table 1 Comparison of risk of bias judgment for all papers and for rounds 1 and 2 separately

From: Elaborating on the assessment of the risk of bias in prognostic studies in pain rehabilitation using QUIPS—aspects of interrater agreement

All (43 papers) Rater 2 Total
   Low Moderate High  
 Rater 1 Low 88 (34%) 39 (15%) 6 (2%) 133 (52%)
Moderate 36 (14%) 47 (18%) 4 (2%) 87 (34%)
High 6 (2%) 10 (4%) 22 (9%) 38 (15%)
 Total 130 (50%) 96 (37%) 32 (12%) 258 (100%)
Round 1 (15 papers)  
 Rater 1 Low 32 (36%) 10 (11%) 3 (3%) 45 (50%)
Moderate 17 (19%) 18 (20%) 1 (1%) 36 (40%)
High 2 (2%) 4 (4%) 3 (3%) 9 (10%)
 Total 51 (57%) 32 (36%) 7 (8%) 90 (100%)
Round 2 (28 papers)
 Rater 1 Low 56 (33%) 29 (17%) 3 (2%) 88 (52%)
Moderate 19 (11%) 29 (17%) 3 (2%) 51 (30%)
High 4 (2%) 6 (4%) 19 (11%) 29 (17%)
 Total 79 (47%) 64 (38%) 25 (15%) 168 (100%)
Back to article page

Diagnostic and Prognostic Research

ISSN: 2397-7523

Contact us