Skip to main content
. 2021 Dec 28;2021(12):CD010622. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010622.pub2
Items (1) Health‐related quality of life (2) Hypothyroidism (3) Adverse events (4) All‐cause mortality (4) Thyroid volume (6) Costs
Trial limitations
(risk of bias)a Was random sequence generation used (i.e. no potential for selection bias)? Unclear Unclear Unclear Unclear Unclear Not reported
 
Was allocation concealment used (i.e. no potential for selection bias)? Unclear Unclear
  Unclear Unclear Unclear
Was there blinding of participants and personnel (i.e. no potential for performance bias), or outcome not likely to be influenced by lack of blinding? Yes (participants) Yes Yes Yes Yes
Was there blinding of outcome assessment (i.e. no potential for detection bias), or was outcome measurement not likely to be influenced by lack of blinding? Yes (participants) Yes Yes Yes Yes
Was an objective outcome used? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Were more than 80% of participants enrolled in trials included in the analysis (i.e. no potential reporting bias)?e Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Were data reported consistently for the outcome of interest (i.e. no potential selective reporting)? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
No other biases reported (i.e. no potential of other bias)? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Did the trials end up as scheduled (i.e. not stopped early)? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Inconsistencyb Point estimates did not vary widely? NA Yes Yes NA Yes
To what extent did confidence intervals overlap (substantial: all confidence intervals overlap at least one of the included studies point estimate; some: confidence intervals overlap but not all overlap at least one point estimate; no: at least one outlier: where the confidence interval of some of the studies do not overlap with those of most included studies)? NA Substantial Substantial NA Substantial
Was the direction of effect consistent? NA Yes Yes NA Yes
What was the magnitude of statistical heterogeneity (as measured by I²) ‐ low (I² < 40%), moderate (I² 40% to 60%), high I² > 60%)? NA Low Low NA High (↓)
Was the test for heterogeneity statistically significant (P < 0.1)? NA Not statistically significant Not statistically significant NA Statistically significant (↓)
Indirectness Were the populations in included studies applicable to the decision context? Highly applicable Highly applicable Highly applicable Highly applicable Highly applicable
Were the interventions in the included studies applicable to the decision context? Highly applicable Highly applicable Highly applicable Highly applicable Highly applicable
Was the included outcome not a surrogate outcome? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Was the outcome timeframe sufficient? Sufficient Sufficient Sufficient Sufficient Sufficient
Were the conclusions based on direct comparisons? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Imprecisionc Was the confidence interval for the pooled estimate not consistent with benefit and harm? NA Yes No (↓) NA Yes
What is the magnitude of the median sample size (high: 300 participants, intermediate: 100 to 300 participants, low: < 100 participants)?e Low (↓)
  Low (↓) Low (↓) Low (↓) Low (↓)
What was the magnitude of the number of included studies (large: > 10 studies, moderate: 5 to 10 studies, small: < 5 studies)?e Small (↓) Moderate Moderate
  Moderate
  Moderate
 
Was the outcome a common event (e.g. occurs more than 1/100)? NA Yes Yes NA NA
Publication biasd Was a comprehensive search conducted? Yes Yes Yes
  Yes Yes
Was grey literature searched? Yes Yes
  Yes Yes
  Yes
Were no restrictions applied to study selection on the basis of language? Yes Yes
  Yes Yes
  Yes
There was no industry influence on studies included in the review? No (↓) No (↓)
  No (↓) No (↓)
  No (↓)
There was no evidence of funnel plot asymmetry? NA NA
  NA NA
  NA
There was no discrepancy in findings between published and unpublished trials? Unclear Unclear
  Unclear Unclear
  Unclear
aQuestions on risk of bias are answered in relation to the majority of the aggregated evidence in the meta‐analysis rather than to individual trials.
bQuestions on inconsistency are primarily based on visual assessment of forest plots and the statistical quantification of heterogeneity based on I².
cWhen judging the width of the confidence interval, it is recommended that one uses a clinical decision threshold to assess whether the imprecision is clinically meaningful.
dQuestions address comprehensiveness of the search strategy, industry influence, funnel plot asymmetry, and discrepancies between published and unpublished trials.
eDepends on the context of the systematic review area.
(↓): key item for potential downgrading the certainty of the evidence (GRADE), as shown in the footnotes of the summary of findings table(s); NA: not applicable