New Methodology Review

Comparison of central adjudication of outcomes and onsite outcome assessment on treatment effect estimates

A recently published Methodology Review investigates the practice of recommending multicentre RCTs have a central adjudication committee, rather than relying on the outcomes reported by assessors at the local site, where the decision might be subjective. This is to address detection bias, which is also called ascertainment bias or observer bias. The adjudication process can be very time- and resource-consuming. There is very limited evidence to support the use of these adjudication committees. The researchers combined the findings of 47 RCTs identified and found no evidence of difference, on average, in treatment effect estimates from onsite assessors and adjudication committees (combined ratio of odds ratios: 1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.97 to 1.04).