Khosroshahi 2015.
Study characteristics | ||
Methods |
|
|
Participants |
|
|
Interventions | Treatment group
Control group
Both groups
|
|
Outcomes |
|
|
Notes |
|
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Patients were randomly divided into two groups using the www.randomization.org website |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | The randomisation list was provided to the HD centre nurses (data supplied via correspondence) |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Practitioners were blinded, but there was no mention of the blinding of patients |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | The practitioner who evaluated the outcome was not aware of the patient groups and type of treatment |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | All participants completed the study, and there were no losses during the follow‐up |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | High risk | Trial registration (https://www.irct.ir/trial/2728) was completed retrospectively. Fever and chills, considered as primary consequences (observed at the beginning of the study and during each HD session) and culture results and catheter removal, considered secondary consequences, were not reported as planned |
Other bias | High risk | The study population considered suspected CRBSI, which resulted of 45% unconfirmed cases (negative blood cultures). There is no mention of which group these negative cultures belonged to, which could significantly influence the results |