The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions.

  title={The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions.},
  author={Sara H. Downs and Nick Black},
  journal={Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health},
  pages={377 - 384}
  • S. DownsN. Black
  • Published 1 June 1998
  • Medicine, Psychology
  • Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
OBJECTIVE To test the feasibility of creating a valid and reliable checklist with the following features: appropriate for assessing both randomised and non-randomised studies; provision of both an overall score for study quality and a profile of scores not only for the quality of reporting, internal validity (bias and confounding) and power, but also for external validity. [] Key MethodDESIGN A pilot version was first developed, based on epidemiological principles, reviews, and existing checklists for…

A checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of validation studies on self-report instruments for physical activity and sedentary behavior.

Checklists may be useful to assess the quality of studies designed to validate physical activity instruments and future research should test checklist internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and criterion validity.

Development and validation of a quality appraisal tool for validity studies (QAVALS)

QAVALS is the first quality appraisal tool specifically designed to address common types of validity and demonstrates strong content validity, good overall inter-rater and excellent test–retest reliability.

Validity and Inter-Rater Reliability Testing of Quality Assessment Instruments

Variable agreement for the NOS, and lack of evidence that it discriminates studies that may provide biased results, underscores the need for more detailed guidance to apply the tool in systematic reviews.

Scales to Assess the Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review

A valid and reliable scale for the assessment of the methodological quality of physical therapy trials needs to be developed after it was found that the Jadad Scale presented the best validity and reliability evidence; however, its validity forPhysical therapy trials has not been supported.

Identification of tools used to assess the external validity of randomized controlled trials in reviews: a systematic review of measurement properties

No available tool can be fully recommended to assess the external validity of RCTs in systematic reviews and several steps are required to overcome the identified difficulties to either adapt and validate available tools or to develop a better suitable tool.

Assessment of the risk of bias in rehabilitation reviews

  • S. FarmerD. WoodI. SwainA. Pandyan
  • Psychology, Medicine
    International journal of rehabilitation research. Internationale Zeitschrift fur Rehabilitationsforschung. Revue internationale de recherches de readaptation
  • 2012
A questionnaire to quantify the risk of bias in systematic reviews, the review paper assessment (RPA) tool, was developed and tested and revised to ensure that questions had dichotomous answers so that the positive responses scored one.



A proposal for structured reporting of randomized controlled trials. The Standards of Reporting Trials Group.

A RANDOMIZED controlled trial (RCT) is the most reliable method of assessing the efficacy of health care interventions.1,2Reports of RCTs should provide readers with adequate information about what

Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials.

Empirical evidence is provided that inadequate methodological approaches in controlled trials, particularly those representing poor allocation concealment, are associated with bias.

How study design affects outcomes in comparisons of therapy. I: Medical.

Any evaluation of an innovation may include both bias and the true efficacy of the new therapy, therefore any evaluation of a new therapy may consider making adjustments for the average bias associated with a study design.

Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials.

It is concluded that an urgent need exists for improved methods in literature searching, quality evaluation of trials, and synthesizing of the results.

The effectiveness of surgery for stress incontinence in women: a systematic review.

There is an urgent need for some large, rigorous, prospective studies of high quality evaluating surgery for stress incontinence, the effectiveness of different procedures and the frequency of complications associated with each procedure.

Assessing Reports of Therapeutic Trials

A check list is described which helps the systematic assessment of reports of therapeutic trials, particularly the aspects that need to be considered in assessing their validity, and has been found useful in assessing claims made for drugs and other therapeutic measures on the basis of published reports.

Reporting on methods in clinical trials.

Survey of clinical trials published in the New England Journal of Medicine, the Lancet, and the British Medical Journal found information about statistical analyses, statistical methods used, and random allocation of subjects was reported, yet only 19 per cent reported the method of randomization.

Sociodemographic and motivational characteristics of parents who volunteer their children for clinical research: a controlled study.

Volunteering parents had less social support, and they displayed greater health seeking behaviour and consumed more habit forming substances.

Use of check lists in assessing the statistical content of medical studies.

Examination of the use of the check lists showed that most papers contained statistical failings, many of which could easily be remedied.