Assessment of study quality for systematic reviews: a comparison of the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool and the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool: methodological research
- PMID: 20698919
- DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01516.x
Assessment of study quality for systematic reviews: a comparison of the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool and the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool: methodological research
Abstract
Background: The Cochrane Collaboration is strongly encouraging the use of a newly developed tool, the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool (CCRBT), for all review groups. However, the psychometric properties of this tool to date have yet to be described. Thus, the objective of this study was to add information about psychometric properties of the CCRBT including inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity, in comparison with the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool (EPHPP).
Methods: Both tools were used to assess the methodological quality of 20 randomized controlled trials included in our systematic review of the effectiveness of knowledge translation interventions to improve the management of cancer pain. Each study assessment was completed independently by two reviewers using each tool. We analysed the inter-rater reliability of each tool's individual domains, as well as final grade assigned to each study.
Results: The EPHPP had fair inter-rater agreement for individual domains and excellent agreement for the final grade. In contrast, the CCRBT had slight inter-rater agreement for individual domains and fair inter-rater agreement for final grade. Of interest, no agreement between the two tools was evident in their final grade assigned to each study. Although both tools were developed to assess 'quality of the evidence', they appear to measure different constructs.
Conclusions: Both tools performed quite differently when evaluating the risk of bias or methodological quality of studies in knowledge translation interventions for cancer pain. The newly introduced CCRBT assigned these studies a higher risk of bias. Its psychometric properties need to be more thoroughly validated, in a range of research fields, to understand fully how to interpret results from its application.
© 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Similar articles
-
Interrater reliability in assessing quality of diagnostic accuracy studies using the QUADAS tool. A preliminary assessment.Acad Radiol. 2006 Jul;13(7):803-10. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2006.03.008. Acad Radiol. 2006. PMID: 16777553
-
Reliability of 3 assessment tools used to evaluate randomized controlled trials for treatment of neck pain.Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 Mar 15;37(6):515-22. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31822671eb. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012. PMID: 21673624
-
Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management: part 6. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies.Pain Physician. 2009 Sep-Oct;12(5):819-50. Pain Physician. 2009. PMID: 19787009
-
Cochrane reviews used more rigorous methods than non-Cochrane reviews: survey of systematic reviews in physiotherapy.J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Oct;62(10):1021-30. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.09.018. Epub 2009 Mar 17. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009. PMID: 19282144 Review.
-
Assessment of the methodological quality of systematic reviews published in the urological literature from 1998 to 2008.J Urol. 2010 Aug;184(2):648-53. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.03.127. Epub 2010 Jun 19. J Urol. 2010. PMID: 20639030 Review.
Cited by
-
Patterns and Challenges in Help-Seeking for Addiction among Men: A Systematic Review.J Clin Med. 2024 Oct 12;13(20):6086. doi: 10.3390/jcm13206086. J Clin Med. 2024. PMID: 39458039 Free PMC article. Review.
-
mHealth interventions to reduce maternal and child mortality in Sub-Saharan Africa and Southern Asia: A systematic literature review.Front Glob Womens Health. 2022 Aug 25;3:942146. doi: 10.3389/fgwh.2022.942146. eCollection 2022. Front Glob Womens Health. 2022. PMID: 36090599 Free PMC article.
-
Can child pneumonia in low-resource settings be treated without antibiotics? A systematic review & meta-analysis.J Glob Health. 2022 Nov 12;12:10007. doi: 10.7189/jogh.12.10007. J Glob Health. 2022. PMID: 36370376 Free PMC article.
-
Transtheoretical model-based nutritional interventions in adolescents: a systematic review.BMC Public Health. 2020 Oct 14;20(1):1543. doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-09643-z. BMC Public Health. 2020. PMID: 33054748 Free PMC article.
-
Which children with chest-indrawing pneumonia can be safely treated at home, and under what conditions is it safe to do so? A systematic review of evidence from low- and middle-income countries.J Glob Health. 2022 Aug 31;12:10008. doi: 10.7189/jogh.12.10008. J Glob Health. 2022. PMID: 36040992 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical