The methodological quality assessment tools for preclinical and clinical studies, systematic review and meta‐analysis, and clinical practice guideline: a systematic review
Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine2015Vol. 8(1), pp. 2–10
Citations Over TimeTop 1% of 2015 papers
Xian‐Tao Zeng, Yonggang Zhang, Joey S.W. Kwong, Chao Zhang, Sheng Li, Feng Sun, Yu‐Ming Niu, Liang Du
Abstract
We have successfully identified a variety of methodological assessment tools for different types of study design. However, further efforts in the development of critical appraisal tools are warranted since there is currently a lack of such tools for other fields, e.g. genetic studies, and some existing tools (nested case-control studies and case reports, for example) are in need of updating to be in line with current research practice and rigor. In addition, it is very important that all critical appraisal tools remain subjective and performance bias is effectively avoided.
Related Papers
- → AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both(2017)9,991 cited
- → The development of a critical appraisal tool for use in systematic reviews addressing questions of prevalence(2014)1,399 cited
- → Critical Appraisal of a Systematic Review: A Concise Review(2022)26 cited
- → Appendix 2: Critical Appraisal Tools(2006)8 cited
- The Development of a Critical Appraisal Tool for Use in Systematic Reviews: Addressing Questions of Prevalence(2014)