Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials

被引:3477
作者
Maher, CG
Sherrington, C
Herbert, RD
Moseley, AM
Elkins, M
机构
[1] Univ Sydney, Fac Hlth Sci, Sch Physiotherapy, Lidcombe, NSW 1825, Australia
[2] Univ New S Wales, Prince Wales Med Res Inst, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[3] Univ Sydney, Dept Med, Rehabil Studies Unit, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
[4] Royal Prince Alfred Hosp, Dept Resp Med, Camperdown, NSW 2050, Australia
来源
PHYSICAL THERAPY | 2003年 / 83卷 / 08期
关键词
evidence-based medicine; meta-anadysis; physical therapy; randomized controlled trials;
D O I
10.1093/ptj/83.8.713
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and Purpose. Assessment of the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is common practice in systematic reviews. However; the reliability of data obtained with most quality assessment scales has not been established. This report describes 2 studies designed to investigate the reliability of data obtained with the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale developed to rate the quality of RCTs evaluating physical therapist interventions. Method. In the first study, 11 raters independently rated 25 RCTs randomly selected from the PEDro database. In the second study, 2 raters rated 120 RCTs randomly selected from the PEDro database, and disagreements were resolved by a third rater; this generated a set of individual rater and consensus ratings. The process was repeated by independent raters to create a second set of individual and consensus ratings. Reliability of ratings of PEDro scale items was calculated using multi-rater kappas, and reliability of the total (summed) score was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC [ 1, 1]). Results. The kappa value for each of the I I items ranged from .36 to .80 for individual assessors and from .50 to .79 for consensus ratings generated by groups of 2 or 3 raters. The ICC for the total score was .56 (95% confidence interval = .47-.65) for ratings by individuals, and the ICC for consensus ratings was .68 (95% confidence interval = .57-.76). Discussion and Conclusion. The reliability of ratings of PEDro scale items varied from "fair" to "substantial," and the reliability of the total PEDro score was "fair" to "good.".
引用
收藏
页码:713 / 721
页数:9
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]  
Albright J, 2001, PHYS THER, V81, P1629
[2]   Reliability of Chalmers' scale to assess quality in meta-analyses on pharmacological treatments for osteoporosis [J].
Bérard, A ;
Andreu, N ;
Tétrault, JP ;
Niyonsenga, T ;
Myhal, D .
ANNALS OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2000, 10 (08) :498-503
[3]  
Berghmans LCM, 1998, BRIT J UROL, V82, P181
[4]   Quality in the reporting of randomized trials in surgery: Is the Jadad scale reliable? [J].
Bhandari, M ;
Richards, RR ;
Sprague, S ;
Schemitsch, EH .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 2001, 22 (06) :687-688
[5]   Assessing the quality of randomized trials:: Reliability of the Jadad scale [J].
Clark, HD ;
Wells, GA ;
Huët, C ;
McAlister, FA ;
Salmi, LR ;
Fergusson, D ;
Laupacis, A .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1999, 20 (05) :448-452
[6]   Impact of quality scales on levels of evidence inferred from a systematic review of exercise therapy and low back pain [J].
Colle, F ;
Rannou, F ;
Revel, M ;
Fermanian, J ;
Poiraudeau, S .
ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION, 2002, 83 (12) :1745-1752
[7]   The effect of irradiation with ultra-violet light on the frequency of attacks of upper respiratory disease (common colds) [J].
Doull, JA ;
Hardy, M ;
Clark, JH ;
Herman, NB .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HYGIENE, 1931, 13 (02) :460-477
[8]  
Egger M, 2003, Health Technol Assess, V7, P1
[9]   Does spinal manipulative therapy help people with chronic low back pain? [J].
Ferreira, ML ;
Ferreira, PH ;
Latimer, J ;
Herbert, R ;
Maher, CG .
AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF PHYSIOTHERAPY, 2002, 48 (04) :277-284
[10]  
Fleiss J. L., 1986, DESIGN ANAL CLIN EXP, DOI DOI 10.1002/9781118032923