a suggestion for quality assessment in systematic reviews of observational studies in nutritional epidemiology

Clicks: 326
ID: 245421
2016
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #15 of 29 articles by views in fiabilitate şi durabilitate

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: It is important to control the quality level of the observational studies in conducting meta-analyses. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) is a representative tool used for this purpose. We investigated the relationship between high-quality (HQ) defined using NOS and the results of subgroup analysis according to study design. METHODS: We selected systematic review studies with meta-analysis which performed a quality evaluation on observational studies of diet and cancer by NOS. HQ determinations and the distribution of study designs were examined. Subgroup analyses according to quality level as defined by the NOS were also extracted. Equivalence was evaluated based on the summary effect size (sES) and 95% confidence intervals computed in the subgroup analysis. RESULTS: The meta-analysis results of the HQ and cohort groups were identical. The overall sES, which was obtained by combining the sES when equivalence was observed between the cohort and case-control groups, also showed equivalence. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that it is more reasonable to control for quality level by performing subgroup analysis according to study design rather than by using HQ based on the NOS quality assessment tool.
Reference Key
bae2016epidemiologya Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;Jong-Myon Bae
Journal fiabilitate şi durabilitate
Year 2016
DOI
10.4178/epih.e2016014
URL
http://www.e-epih.org/upload/pdf/epih-38-e2016014.pdf
Keywords
meta-analysis research design quality evaluation quality controlmedicine

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.