Development and Implementation of the Standards for Evaluating and Reporting Epidemiologic Studies on Chronic Disease Incidence or Prevalence

T Shamliyan, MT Ansari, G Raman, N Berkman, M Grant, G Janes, M Maglione, D Moher, M Nasser, K Robinson, J Segal, S Tsouros

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

We aimed to develop quality checklists for observational non-therapeutic studies. Based on a systematic review of current practices of quality assessment of observational studies, collaborating co-authors from Evidence-based Practice Centers and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed a new checklist for studies examining incidence and prevalence of chronic conditions, evaluated face and content validity, and discrimination validity to distinguish reporting from methodological quality. This new checklist is available in text format or as a relational database to produce standardized reports with flaws in reporting quality, external (six criteria), and internal (five criteria) validity of the studies. Study and hypotheses (subgroups) level analyses are possible with predetermined in protocol templates criteria of major and minor flaws. Consensus around justified research specific methodological standards and reliability tests should precede quality evaluation of primary studies to assure confidence in quality assessment. To be effective, policy decisions should be made based on comprehensive systematic evidence reviews that include transparent, standardized quality appraisals. Implementation of the developed checklists would increase transparency and quality of research leading to effective informed decisions in health care.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)183-190
Number of pages0
JournalAmerican Journal of Public Health Research
Volume7
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Development and Implementation of the Standards for Evaluating and Reporting Epidemiologic Studies on Chronic Disease Incidence or Prevalence'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this