Objective: This study aims to evaluate a risk of bias by Risk of Bias tool and RoBANS(Risk of Bias Assessment tool for Non-randomized Study) tool for clinical trial papers proving treatment effect of herbs to alopecia and provides the newest reason of...
Objective: This study aims to evaluate a risk of bias by Risk of Bias tool and RoBANS(Risk of Bias Assessment tool for Non-randomized Study) tool for clinical trial papers proving treatment effect of herbs to alopecia and provides the newest reason of effectiveness of herbs to alopecia. Methos: Data were collected through electronic database including NDSL, KISS, KMBASE, Koreantk, OASIS, KoreaMed, KISTI, Pubmd, Cochrane CENTRAL and CINAHL. Two experts in Oriental Medince assessed risk of bias of randomized controlled trials by Cochrane group``s Risk of Bias tool and non-randomized controlled trials by RoBANS tool after searching, reviewing and selecting papers. Results: Total number of selected trials is 20 including 4 randomized controlled trials, 13 non-randomized controlled trials and 3 case reports. This study evaluates the risk of bias of 17 papers including 4 randomized controlled trials and 13 non-randomized controlled trials except 3 case reports by risk of bias tool and RoBANS tool. All papers of randomized controlled trials are evaluated unclear for random sequence generation and allocation concealment as there are no word on them. And all papers of non-randomized controlled trials are evaluated unclear for blinding of outcome assessments and relatively low for others. Conclusion: We must try to specify concretely methods of allocation concealment after planning and practicing it for reducing a selection bias in randomized controlled trials. Also report a reason of missing value and blinding outcome assessments. And we have to agonize and mention methods of blinding of researchers for reducing a detection bias in non-randomized controlled trials.