Back

Operationalization of Cochrane's risk of bias 2 tool (RoB 2) in the context of psychotherapy trials

Miguel, C.; Harrer, M.; Karyotaki, E.; Sahker, E.; Sakata, M.; Furukawa, T.; Cuijpers, P.

2025-06-30 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.1101/2025.06.26.25330349 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundEvaluating risk of bias (RoB) is a crucial step in systematic reviews and meta-analyses to ensure trustworthy evidence. Cochranes RoB 2 tool is the most widely used approach for assessing risk of bias in randomized controlled trials. However, its application can be challenging, particularly in fields like psychotherapy, where standard trial procedures such as double blinding are often unfeasible. ObjectiveThis article presents a context-specific operationalization and implementation guideline for applying RoB 2 to psychotherapy trials, addressing common challenges and ambiguities in this field. MethodThis guideline was developed based on empirical evidence, an expert consensus process, and iterative piloting. It provides a structured interpretation of all RoB 2 domains and signalling questions, adapted to the common methodological features of psychotherapy trials. ResultsThe operationalization resulted in 24 standardized RoB items with a harmonized scoring logic, accompanied by a practical handbook offering domainspecific advice and examples relevant to psychotherapy research. To support its use, two open-access digital assistant tools (web-based and spreadsheet formats) were developed to guide users through the rating process and facilitate integration with systematic review workflows (metapsy.org/rob). ConclusionThis guidance offers a practical approach for applying RoB 2 in psychotherapy outcome research. It is intended to be used alongside the Cochrane manual and may help improve the transparency and reproducibility of RoB 2 assessments for psychotherapy trials.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 5%
23.3%
2
Systematic Reviews
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.4%
3
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.7%
4
Research Synthesis Methods
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.6%
5
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
50% of probability mass above
6
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 4%
4.5%
7
Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.1%
8
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.4%
9
European Psychiatry
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.0%
10
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
11
BMC Medical Research Methodology
43 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.8%
12
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
43 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
13
BMJ Mental Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.4%
14
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
15
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
16
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
17
Journal of Affective Disorders
81 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
18
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
19
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica
10 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
20
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 63%
0.7%
21
Scientific Data
174 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
22
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
23
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
24
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
25
Psychiatry Research
35 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
26
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 78%
0.7%
27
Acta Neuropsychiatrica
12 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
28
Frontiers in Psychiatry
83 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.5%
29
Social Science & Medicine
15 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
30
Epidemiology
26 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.5%