Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles.
Lisa Hartling and colleagues provide first data about validity and
feasibility of the risk of bias tool which is recommended by the Cochrane
Collaboration for quality assessment in systematic reviews. Their findings
are essential for both reviewers and critical readers of systematic
reviews. In addition to their recommendation of an explicit a priori
definition of how to use the tool in a systematic review I would like to
propose to add this information in the review protocol. This protocol as
it was most recently recommended within the PRISMA statement  could
help to improve the quality of systematic reviews. Furthermore
registration (possible at www.crd.york.ac.uk) and publication of these
protocols may help other researchers in this field to use the risk of bias
tool more appropriately.
 Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC,
Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D. The PRISMA
statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies
that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ
2009 Jul 21;339:b2700. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2700.
No competing interests
24 October 2009
Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital Heidelberg, Germany