Assessing the methodological quality of nonrandomized intervention studies

被引:92
作者
Saunders, LD [1 ]
Soomro, GM
Buckingham, J
Jamtvedt, G
Raina, P
机构
[1] Univ Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2M7, Canada
[2] McMaster Univ, Hamilton, ON, Canada
关键词
systematic reviews; nonrandomized studies; validity;
D O I
10.1177/0193945902250039
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
In many areas of health care, randomized controlled trials (the best evidence regarding the effectiveness of health care interventions) are lacking and decision-makers have to rely on evidence from nonrandomized studies (NRS). We conducted a Medline search to identify English-language articles describing instruments for assessing the quality of NRS of health care interventions. These instruments varied greatly in scope, in the number and types of items and in developmental rigor. Items commonly included were those related to specification of study questions, allocation method, comparability of groups, and blinding of outcome assessment. We do not support the development of a generic scale to evaluate the methodological quality of nonrandomized intervention studies. Instead, further study should be directed to investigate the degree to which, and the circumstances under which, different methodological characteristics are associated with bias. This information will assist researchers in identifying a priori which methodological characteristics need careful evaluation in particular studies.
引用
收藏
页码:223 / 237
页数:15
相关论文
共 27 条
[1]  
BASS JL, 1993, PEDIATRICS, V92, P544
[2]  
BOERS M, 1991, J RHEUMATOL, V18, P316
[3]   THE BCG CONTROVERSY - A METHODOLOGICAL AND STATISTICAL REAPPRAISAL [J].
CLEMENS, JD ;
CHUONG, JJH ;
FEINSTEIN, AR .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1983, 249 (17) :2362-2369
[4]  
*COCHR COLL, 2001, REV HDB
[5]   The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions [J].
Downs, SH ;
Black, N .
JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY AND COMMUNITY HEALTH, 1998, 52 (06) :377-384
[7]   USERS GUIDES TO THE MEDICAL LITERATURE .2. HOW TO USE AN ARTICLE ABOUT THERAPY OR PREVENTION .A. ARE THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY VALID [J].
GUYATT, GH ;
SACKETT, DL ;
COOK, DJ .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1993, 270 (21) :2598-2601
[8]   Rating the quality of evidence for clinical practice guidelines [J].
Hadorn, DC ;
Baker, D ;
Hodges, JS ;
Hicks, N .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1996, 49 (07) :749-754
[9]  
Heneghan AM, 1996, PEDIATRICS, V97, P535
[10]   DEVELOPING IMPROVED OBSERVATIONAL METHODS FOR EVALUATING THERAPEUTIC EFFECTIVENESS [J].
HORWITZ, RI ;
VISCOLI, CM ;
CLEMENS, JD ;
SADOCK, RT .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1990, 89 (05) :630-638