Skip to main content
. 2016 Oct 11;2016(10):CD002142. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002142.pub4

Belgium 1966.

Methods 1966 to 1977
RCT
Participants 224 patients
 Stages I, II, III
Trial data used in subgroup analyses for sex, age and histology
Interventions Surgery + radiotherapy vs surgery alone
 RT details
 60 Gy in 30 fractions in 6 weeks
 Prescription technique: isodose 90%
 Machine used: Co60
 Average field size (cm): 15 × 9
 Clinical target volume: bronchial stump, hilum, mediastinum
 Technique: spinal cord blocks, oblique fields, lateral fields
Outcomes Survival
Notes 20 small cell participants excluded from meta‐analysis
 Unable to supply data for 2 participants
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Comment: stated as randomised in paper; checks run on IPD suggest adequate sequence generation
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Quote: "randomisation carried out via sealed envelope"
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Comment: trial not blinded owing to the nature of the intervention; outcome not likely to be influenced by lack of blinding
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Comment: individual participant data obtained and checked for all outcomes
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Comment: individual participant data obtained and checked for all outcomes
Other bias Low risk Comment: study apparently free of other sources of bias