Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials - Current issues and future directions

被引:315
作者
Moher, D
Jadad, AR
Tugwell, P
机构
[1] MCMASTER UNIV,DEPT CLIN EPIDEMIOL & BIOSTAT,HAMILTON,ON L8S 4M4,CANADA
[2] UNIV OTTAWA,DEPT MED,OTTAWA,ON K1H 8L6,CANADA
关键词
D O I
10.1017/S0266462300009570
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials is a relatively new and important development. Three approaches have been developed: component, checklist, and scale assessment. Component approaches evaluate selected aspects of trials, such as masking. Checklists and scales involve lists of items thought to be integral to study quality. Scales, unlike the other methods, provide a summary numeric score of quality, which can be formally incorporated into a systematic review. Most scales to date have not been developed with sufficient rigor, however. Empirical evidence indicates that differences in scale development can lead to important differences in quality assessment. Several methods for including quality scores in systematic reviews have been proposed, but since little empirical evidence supports any given method, results must be interpreted cautiously. Future efforts may be best focused on gathering more empirical evidence to identify trial characteristics directly related to bias in the estimates of intervention effects and on improving the way in which trials are reported.
引用
收藏
页码:195 / 208
页数:14
相关论文
共 55 条
  • [1] PUBLICATIONS ON CLINICAL-TRIALS WITH X-RAY CONTRAST-MEDIA - DIFFERENCES IN QUALITY BETWEEN JOURNALS AND DECADES
    ANDREW, E
    EIDE, H
    FUGLERUD, P
    HAGEN, EK
    KRISTOFFERSEN, DT
    LAMBRECHTS, M
    WAALER, A
    WEIBYE, M
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 1990, 10 (02) : 92 - 97
  • [2] METHOD FOR ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTING STANDARD OF CLINICAL-TRIALS WITH ROENTGEN CONTRAST-MEDIA
    ANDREW, E
    [J]. ACTA RADIOLOGICA-DIAGNOSIS, 1984, 25 (01): : 55 - 58
  • [3] [Anonymous], 1948, Br Med J, V2, P769
  • [4] [Anonymous], J CLIN EPIDEMIOL
  • [5] BADGLEY RF, 1961, CAN MED ASSOC J, V85, P246
  • [6] BECKERMAN H, 1990, EFFECTIVITEIT FYSIOT, pR20
  • [7] IS THE CLINICAL-TRIAL EVIDENCE ABOUT NEW DRUGS STATISTICALLY ADEQUATE
    BLAND, JM
    JONES, DR
    BENNETT, S
    COOK, DG
    HAINES, AP
    MACFARLANE, AJ
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 1985, 19 (02) : 155 - 160
  • [8] METAANALYSIS OF DIABETES PATIENT EDUCATION RESEARCH - VARIATIONS IN INTERVENTION EFFECTS ACROSS STUDIES
    BROWN, SA
    [J]. RESEARCH IN NURSING & HEALTH, 1992, 15 (06) : 409 - 419
  • [9] BROWN SA, 1991, NURS RES, V40, P352
  • [10] THE COCHRANE-COLLABORATION - PREPARING, MAINTAINING, AND DISSEMINATING SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS OF THE EFFECTS OF HEALTH-CARE
    CHALMERS, I
    [J]. DOING MORE GOOD THAN HARM: THE EVALUATION OF HEALTH CARE INTERVENTIONS, 1993, 703 : 156 - 165