Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2020 Feb 29;7(1):7.
doi: 10.1186/s40779-020-00238-8.

Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment tools for primary and secondary medical studies: what are they and which is better?

Affiliations
Review

Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment tools for primary and secondary medical studies: what are they and which is better?

Lin-Lu Ma et al. Mil Med Res. .

Abstract

Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment is an important step before study initiation usage. Therefore, accurately judging study type is the first priority, and the choosing proper tool is also important. In this review, we introduced methodological quality assessment tools for randomized controlled trial (including individual and cluster), animal study, non-randomized interventional studies (including follow-up study, controlled before-and-after study, before-after/ pre-post study, uncontrolled longitudinal study, interrupted time series study), cohort study, case-control study, cross-sectional study (including analytical and descriptive), observational case series and case reports, comparative effectiveness research, diagnostic study, health economic evaluation, prediction study (including predictor finding study, prediction model impact study, prognostic prediction model study), qualitative study, outcome measurement instruments (including patient - reported outcome measure development, content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, cross-cultural validity/ measurement invariance, reliability, measurement error, criterion validity, hypotheses testing for construct validity, and responsiveness), systematic review and meta-analysis, and clinical practice guideline. The readers of our review can distinguish the types of medical studies and choose appropriate tools. In one word, comprehensively mastering relevant knowledge and implementing more practices are basic requirements for correctly assessing the methodological quality.

Keywords: Appraisal tool; Critical appraisal; Interventional study; Methodological quality; Methodology checklist; Observational study; Outcome measurement instrument; Qualitative study; Quality assessment; Risk of bias.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

    1. Stavrou A, Challoumas D, Dimitrakakis G. Archibald Cochrane (1909-1988): the father of evidence-based medicine. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2013;18(1):121–124. doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivt451. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Group E-BMW Evidence-based medicine. A new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA. 1992;268(17):2420–2425. doi: 10.1001/jama.1992.03490170092032. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Levin A. The Cochrane collaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135(4):309–312. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-135-4-200108210-00035. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lau J, Ioannidis JP, Schmid CH. Summing up evidence: one answer is not always enough. Lancet. 1998;351(9096):123–127. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(97)08468-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Clarke M, Chalmers I. Meta-analyses, multivariate analyses, and coping with the play of chance. Lancet. 1998;351(9108):1062–1063. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)79032-2. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources