Principles and framework for assessing the risk of bias for studies included in comparative quantitative environmental systematic reviews

Frampton, Geoff and Whaley, Paul and Bennett, Micah and Bilotta, Gary and Dorne, Jean-Lou C. M. and Eales, Jacqualyn and James, Katy and Kohl, Christian and Land, Magnus and Livoreil, Barbara and Makowski, David and Muchiri, Evans and Petrokofsky, Gillian and Randall, Nicola and Schofield, Kate (2022) Principles and framework for assessing the risk of bias for studies included in comparative quantitative environmental systematic reviews. Environmental Evidence, 11 (1): 12. ISSN 2047-2382

Full text not available from this repository.


The internal validity of conclusions about effectiveness or impact in systematic reviews, and of decisions based on them, depends on risk of bias assessments being conducted appropriately. However, a random sample of 50 recently-published articles claiming to be quantitative environmental systematic reviews found 64% did not include any risk of bias assessment, whilst nearly all that did omitted key sources of bias. Other limitations included lack of transparency, conflation of quality constructs, and incomplete application of risk of bias assessments to the data synthesis. This paper addresses deficiencies in risk of bias assessments by highlighting core principles that are required for risk of bias assessments to be fit-for-purpose, and presenting a framework based on these principles to guide review teams on conducting risk of bias assessments appropriately and consistently. The core principles require that risk of bias assessments be Focused, Extensive, Applied and Transparent (FEAT). These principles support risk of bias assessments, appraisal of risk of bias tools, and the development of new tools. The framework follows a Plan-Conduct-Apply-Report approach covering all stages of risk of bias assessment. The scope of this paper is comparative quantitative environmental systematic reviews which address PICO or PECO-type questions including, but not limited to, topic areas such as environmental management, conservation, ecosystem restoration, and analyses of environmental interventions, exposures, impacts and risks.

Item Type:
Journal Article
Journal or Publication Title:
Environmental Evidence
Uncontrolled Keywords:
?? methodologyvaliditybiasrisk of biassystematic errorinternal validityexternal validityquality assessmentcritical appraisalblindingpollutionecologymanagement, monitoring, policy and law ??
ID Code:
Deposited By:
Deposited On:
05 Apr 2022 12:55
Last Modified:
15 Jul 2024 22:30