scholarly journals A case for a study quality appraisal tool in survey studies in psychology

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cleo Protogerou ◽  
Martin S Hagger
Keyword(s):  
Survey Research ◽  
Psychological Research ◽  
Study Quality ◽  
Quality Appraisal ◽  
Fit For Purpose ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Quality Assessments ◽  
Appraisal Tool ◽  
Opinion Article

In this Opinion article, we argue that assessment of study quality is an important practice to promote greater precision, transparency, and evaluation of research in psychology. However, no quality appraisal tools have been developed by psychologists, for psychological research. Given the prominence of survey research in psychology, the development of appropriate means to assess the quality of survey research would yield considerable benefits to researchers conducting, and data analysts evaluating, survey research. To illustrate the longstanding problems resulting from the absence of a fit-for-purpose tool and the application of a variety of quality appraisal strategies, we provide examples from a brief summary of quality assessments from meta-analyses of psychological survey research. We conclude that a fit-for-purpose quality appraisal tool for survey studies in psychology is needed.

scholarly journals Differentiating PSP from MSA using MR planimetric measurements: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beatrice Heim ◽  
Florian Krismer ◽  
Klaus Seppi
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Index Test ◽  
Study Quality ◽  
Parkinsonian Syndromes ◽  
Quantitative Mr ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Planimetric Measurements

AbstractDifferential diagnosis of parkinsonian syndromes is considered one of the most challenging in neurology. Quantitative MR planimetric measurements were reported to discriminate between progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) and non-PSP-parkinsonism. Several studies have used midbrain to pons ratio (M/P) and the Magnetic Resonance Parkinsonism Index (MRPI) in distinguishing PSP patients from those with Parkinson's disease. The current meta-analysis aimed to compare the performance of these measures in discriminating PSP from multiple system atrophy (MSA). A systematic MEDLINE review identified 59 out of 2984 studies allowing a calculation of sensitivity and specificity using the MRPI or M/P. Meta-analyses of results were carried out using random effects modelling. To assess study quality and risk of bias, the QUADAS-2 tool was used. Eight studies were suitable for analysis. The meta‐analysis showed a pooled sensitivity and specificity for the MRPI of PSP versus MSA of 79.2% (95% CI 72.7–84.4%) and 91.2% (95% CI 79.5–96.5%), and 84.1% (95% CI 77.2–89.2%) and 89.2% (95% CI 81.8–93.8%), respectively, for the M/P. The QUADAS-2 toolbox revealed a high risk of bias regarding the methodological quality of patient selection and index test, as all patients were seen in a specialized outpatient department without avoiding case control design and no predefined threshold was given regarding MRPI or M/P cut-offs. Planimetric brainstem measurements, in special the MRPI and M/P, yield high diagnostic accuracy for the discrimination of PSP from MSA. However, there is an urgent need for well-designed, prospective validation studies to ameliorate the concerns regarding the risk of bias.

scholarly journals Guidance on conducting systematic reviews/meta-analyses of pharmacoepidemiological studies of safety outcomes: the gap is now filled

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 425-427 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Cortese
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
European Medicines Agency ◽  
Study Quality ◽  
European Network ◽  
Quality Appraisal ◽  
Comprehensive Guidance ◽  
Extraction Study ◽  
Safety Outcomes ◽  
Meta Analyses

Until recently, no comprehensive guidance specifically on the conduction of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of pharmacoepidemiological studies of safety outcomes was available. In December 2015, the European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharamacovigilance (ENCePP), a network coordinated by the European Medicines Agency, published their ‘Guidance on conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of completed comparative pharmacoepidemiological studies of safety outcomes’, filling an important gap in the field. This paper highlights the ENCePP recommendations in terms of study identification, data extraction, study quality appraisal and analytical plan. Although the ENCePP document should not be considered as definitive, since it will likely be refined following researchers’ feedback, it is expected that it will be highly influential and useful for the field, with the ultimate goal to improve and standardise the conduction and reporting of systematic reviews/meta-analyses of pharmacoepidemiological studies of safety outcomes.

scholarly journals The Relationship Between Strategic Planning and Budgeting in Regional Development Planning Agency of Sukabumi City

2019 ◽  
pp. 355
Author(s):  
Fahmi Adicipta ◽  
Bayu Kharisma
Keyword(s):  
Strategic Planning ◽  
Regional Development ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Development Planning ◽  
Quality Appraisal ◽  
Performance Quality ◽  
Planning Agency ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Appraisal Tool

This paper aims to analyze whether Coordination and synchronization of programs or activities and budgeting in regional development planning agency is possible. Lack of synchronization and coordination between SKPD externally so as to affect the quality of development planning. The Relationship Between Strategic Planning and Budgeting Is expected to play a role other than as a control tool, but it can also be used as a performance quality appraisal tool, as well as a tool for the realization of a clean and authoritative government (good governance). There are relationship between strategic planning in Regional Development Planning Agency of sukabumi city  (Renstra) and its budgeting. The relationship particularly can be seen in the flow of Renstra (from vision to activities) and the achievement from targets.

Assessing Study Quality in Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 334-342
Author(s):  
Thomas Hugh Feeley
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Study Quality ◽  
Acceptable Standard ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Relationship Of

Abstract An assumption of meta-analyses is made with regard to the quality of the primary studies included for analysis. Specifically, the process assumes each study is a valid estimation of a hypothesized relationship of interest. In instances when a primary study's quality is below an acceptable standard, one option is for the study be excluded from further analyses. Alternatively, studies of acceptable merit could be further investigated through moderator analyses in an attempt to explain heterogeneity among effect sizes due to quality elements. The current essay discusses methods for evaluating study quality before proposing guidelines for their assessment. It is recommended that future meta-analyses in communication include a dedicated section detailing how study quality is addressed when reviewing studies for inclusion.

Quality Assessment of Economic Evaluations of Suicide and Self-Harm Interventions

Crisis ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 82-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lizell Bustamante Madsen ◽  
Michael Eddleston ◽  
Kristian Schultz Hansen ◽  
Flemming Konradsen
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effective ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Global Public Health ◽  
Quality Appraisal ◽  
Public Health Challenge ◽  
Self Harm ◽  
Harm Prevention ◽  
Appraisal Tool

Abstract. Background: Death following self-harm constitutes a major global public health challenge and there is an urgent need for governments to implement cost-effective, national suicide prevention strategies. Aim: To conduct a systematic review and quality appraisal of the economic evaluations of interventions aimed at preventing suicidal behavior. Method: A systematic literature search was performed in several literature databases to identify relevant articles published from 2003 to 2016. Drummond's 10-item appraisal tool was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Results: In total, 25 documents encompassing 30 economic evaluations were included in the review. Of the identified evaluations, 10 studies were found to be of poor quality, 14 were of average quality, and six studies were considered of good quality. The majority of evaluations found the interventions to be cost-effective. Limitations: Several limitations were identified and discussed in the article. Conclusion: A notable few economic evaluations were identified. The studies were diverse, primarily set in high-income countries, and often based on modeling, emphasizing the need for more primary research into the topic. The discussion of suicide and self-harm prevention should be as nuanced as possible, including health economics along with cultural, social, and political aspects.

Anatomy of Ankle Syndesmotic Ligaments: A Systematic Review of Cadaveric Studies

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 341-350
Author(s):  
Akilesh Anand Prakash
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Surgical Management ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Current Understanding ◽  
Study Quality ◽  
Quality Appraisal ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Diagnosis And Management ◽  
Meta Analyses

Diagnosis and management of isolated syndesmotic injuries are controversial and highly debated. Hence, the aim of this study is to explore and gain the current understanding pertaining to detailed anatomy of syndesmotic ligaments through a systematic review of published cadaveric studies. A systematic review was conducted online for literature published in English using PubMed and Google Scholar, as per PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, up to April 30, 2019. Predefined eligibility criteria were applied, and the data thus compiled was analyzed. Study quality was assessed based on Quality Appraisal for Cadaveric Studies (QUACS) scale. A total of 12 studies reporting 365 ankles were included in this review. Considerable inconsistency in the naming and description of syndesmotic ligaments was observed, with only 2 studies reporting the vasculature of the ligaments. Hence further investigation of the anatomy of the syndesmotic ligaments is recommended so as to better inform clinical practice, as awareness of anatomy is critical for assessment, healing, and successful surgical management. Levels of Evidence: Level III: Systematic review of anatomical dissections

A Preliminary Investigation of the Empirical Validity of Study Quality Appraisal

2016 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryan G. Cook ◽  
Danielle N. Dupuis ◽  
Asha K. Jitendra
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Study Quality ◽  
Students With Learning Disabilities ◽  
Quality Appraisal ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Evidence Based Practices

When classifying the evidence base of practices, special education scholars typically appraise study quality to identify and exclude from consideration in their reviews unacceptable-quality studies that are likely biased and might bias review findings if included. However, study quality appraisals used in the process of identifying evidence-based practices for students with learning and other disabilities have not been empirically validated (e.g., studies classified as unacceptable quality shown to have different, and presumably more biased, effects than high-quality studies). Using Gersten et al.’s (2005) approach for appraising the quality of group experimental studies in special education, we examined whether (a) studies classified as unacceptable quality and high quality had meaningfully different effects and (b) unacceptable-quality studies were more likely to have outlying effects than high-quality studies among 36 group experimental studies that investigated the effectiveness of instructional practices for students with learning disabilities. Our preliminary analyses found that the effects of unacceptable-quality studies were not meaningfully different from the effects of high-quality studies. We discuss implications of these findings and call for more research to be conducted in this area.

scholarly journals A systematic review of the incidence and prevalence of comorbidity in multiple sclerosis: Overview

2015 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 263-281 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Ann Marrie ◽  
Jeffrey Cohen ◽  
Olaf Stuve ◽  
Maria Trojano ◽  
Per Soelberg Sørensen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Reference Lists ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Study Quality ◽  
Case Definitions ◽  
Future Studies ◽  
Source Populations ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Study Designs

Background: Comorbidity is an area of increasing interest in multiple sclerosis (MS). Objective: The objective of this review is to estimate the incidence and prevalence of comorbidity in people with MS and assess the quality of included studies. Methods: We searched the PubMed, SCOPUS, EMBASE and Web of Knowledge databases, conference proceedings, and reference lists of retrieved articles. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts. One reviewer abstracted data using a standardized form and the abstraction was verified by a second reviewer. We assessed study quality using a standardized approach. We quantitatively assessed population-based studies using the I2 statistic, and conducted random-effects meta-analyses. Results: We included 249 articles. Study designs were variable with respect to source populations, case definitions, methods of ascertainment and approaches to reporting findings. Prevalence was reported more frequently than incidence; estimates for prevalence and incidence varied substantially for all conditions. Heterogeneity was high. Conclusion: This review highlights substantial gaps in the epidemiological knowledge of comorbidity in MS worldwide. Little is known about comorbidity in Central or South America, Asia or Africa. Findings in North America and Europe are inconsistent. Future studies should report age-, sex- and ethnicity-specific estimates of incidence and prevalence, and standardize findings to a common population.

scholarly journals Mixed Methods in CAM Research: A Systematic Review of Studies Published in 2012

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felicity L. Bishop ◽  
Michelle M. Holmes
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Complementary Medicine ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Mixed Methods Design ◽  
Quality Appraisal ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative Methods ◽  
Appraisal Tool

Background. Mixed methods research uses qualitative and quantitative methods together in a single study or a series of related studies.Objectives. To review the prevalence and quality of mixed methods studies in complementary medicine.Methods. All studies published in the top 10 integrative and complementary medicine journals in 2012 were screened. The quality of mixed methods studies was appraised using a published tool designed for mixed methods studies.Results. 4% of papers (95 out of 2349) reported mixed methods studies, 80 of which met criteria for applying the quality appraisal tool. The most popular formal mixed methods design was triangulation (used by 74% of studies), followed by embedded (14%), sequential explanatory (8%), and finally sequential exploratory (5%). Quantitative components were generally of higher quality than qualitative components; when quantitative components involved RCTs they were of particularly high quality. Common methodological limitations were identified. Most strikingly, none of the 80 mixed methods studies addressed the philosophical tensions inherent in mixing qualitative and quantitative methods.Conclusions and Implications. The quality of mixed methods research in CAM can be enhanced by addressing philosophical tensions and improving reporting of (a) analytic methods and reflexivity (in qualitative components) and (b) sampling and recruitment-related procedures (in all components).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document