Development of a quality assessment tool for systematic reviews of observational studies (QATSO) of HIV prevalence in men having sex with men and associated risk behaviours

被引：209

作者：

Wong W.C.W. ^{[1
]}

Cheung C.S.K. ^{[2
]}

Hart G.J. ^{[3
]}

机构：

[1] Department of General Practice, Carlton, VIC 3053

[2] Department of Community and Family Medicine, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories

[3] Centre for Sexual Health and HIV Research, University College London, Mortimer Market Centre, London, WC1E 6JB, off Capper St

来源：

Emerging Themes in Epidemiology | / 5卷 / 1期

关键词：

Acquire Immunodeficiency Syndrome; Health Care Decision; Quality Assessment Tool; Methodological Quality Assessment; Pilot Version;

D O I：

10.1186/1742-7622-5-23

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Background. Systematic reviews based on the critical appraisal of observational and analytic studies on HIV prevalence and risk factors for HIV transmission among men having sex with men are very useful for health care decisions and planning. Such appraisal is particularly difficult, however, as the quality assessment tools available for use with observational and analytic studies are poorly established. Methods. We reviewed the existing quality assessment tools for systematic reviews of observational studies and developed a concise quality assessment checklist to help standardise decisions regarding the quality of studies, with careful consideration of issues such as external and internal validity. Results. A pilot version of the checklist was developed based on epidemiological principles, reviews of study designs, and existing checklists for the assessment of observational studies. The Quality Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews of Observational Studies (QATSO) Score consists of five items: External validity (1 item), reporting (2 items), bias (1 item) and confounding factors (1 item). Expert opinions were sought and it was tested on manuscripts that fulfil the inclusion criteria of a systematic review. Like all assessment scales, QATSO may oversimplify and generalise information yet it is inclusive, simple and practical to use, and allows comparability between papers. Conclusion. A specific tool that allows researchers to appraise and guide study quality of observational studies is developed and can be modified for similar studies in the future. © 2008 Wong et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

引用

共 19 条

[1]

Zhang B.C., Chu Q.S., HIV and HIV/AIDS in China, Cell Res, 15, pp. 858-64, (2005)

[2]

Frankis J., Flowers P., Men who have sex with men (MSM) in public sex environments (PSES): A systematic review of quantitative literature, AIDS Care, 17, pp. 273-88, (2005)

[3]

Colby D., Cao N.H., Doussantousse S., Men who have sex with men and HIV in Vietnam: A review, AIDS Educ Prev, 16, pp. 45-54, (2004)

[4]

Moher D., Cook D.J., Eastwood S., Olkin I., Rennie D., Stroup D.F., Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: The QUOROM statement. Quality of reporting of meta-analyses, Lancet, 354, pp. 1896-900, (1999)

[5]

Deeks J.J., Dinnes J., D'Amico R., Sowden A.J., Sakarovitch C., Song F., Petticrew M., Altman D.G., Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies, Health Technol Assess, 7, (2003)

[6]

West S., King V., Carey T.S., Lohr K.N., McKoy N., Sutton S.F., Lux L., Systems to Rate the Strength of Evidence. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 47. 2002

[7]

Stroup D.F., Berlin J.A., Morton S.C., Olkin I., Williamson G.D., Rennie D., Moher D., Becker B.J., Sipe T.A., Thacker S.B., Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: A proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group, JAMA, 283, pp. 2008-12, (2000)

[8]

Von Elm E., Altman D.G., Egger M., Pocock S.J., Gotzsche P.C., Vandenbroucke J.P., The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies, PLoS Medicine, 4, 10, (2007)

[9]

Altman D., Egger M., Pocock S., Vandenbrouke J.P., Von Elm E., Strengthening the reporting of observational epidemiological studies, STROBE Statement: Checklist of Essential Items Version 3, (2005)

[10]

Sanderson S., Tatt I.D., Higgins J.P., Tools for assessing quality and susceptibility to bias in observational studies in epidemiology: A systematic review and annotated bibliography, Int J Epidemiol, 36, pp. 666-676, (2007)

← 1 2 →