Assessing quality of case series studies: Development and validation of an instrument by herbal medicine CAM researchers

Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine

Volumn 15, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 513-522

  Yang, Angela Weihong ^a   Li, Chun Guang ^a   Da Costa, Cliff ^a   Allan, Garry ^a   Reece, John ^a   Xue, Charlie Changli ^a  

^a RMIT UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CASE STUDY; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; CONSTRUCT VALIDITY; CONTENT VALIDITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HERBAL MEDICINE; HUMAN; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PHYSICIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RATING SCALE; RELIABILITY;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; EVALUATION STUDIES AS TOPIC; HERBAL MEDICINE; HUMANS; OBSERVER VARIATION; PHYTOTHERAPY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 67149098073     PISSN: 10755535     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/acm.2007.0806     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. National Health and Medical Research Council. How to Use the Evidence: Assessment and Application of Scientific Evidence. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2000.
2. Black N. Why we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health care. Br Med J 1996;312:1215-1218.
3. Earl-Slater A. Critical appraisal of clinical trials: Advantages and disadvantages of evidence from clinical trials. Br J Clin Govern 2001;6:136-139.
4. Britton A, McKee M, Black N, McPherson K, Sanderson C, Bain C. Choosing between randomized and non-randomized studies: A systematic review. Health Technol Assess 1998;2:1-124.
5. Kunz R, Oxman A. The unpredictability paradox: Review of empirical comparisons of randomized and non-randomized clinical trial. Br Med J 1998;317:1185-1190.
6. Liu JP. Systematic review of non-randomized studies [in Chinese]. Clin J Evid Based Med 2001;1:137-139.
7. Olsen O. Chapter 2: What types of study designs should be included in Cochrane reviews? The Cochrane Library. September 24, 2001. Online document at: http://www.cochrane.dk/nrsmg/docs/chap2.pdf Accessed May 19,2003.
8. Carne X, Arnaiz J-A. Methodological and political issues in clinical pharmacology research by the year 2000. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2000;55:781-785.
9. Khan KS, Riet GT, Glanville J, et al. Undertaking systematic reviews of research on effectiveness: CRD's guidance for those carrying out or commissioning reviews. 2nd ed. York, UK: NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, 2001.
10. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996;17:1-12.
11. Oxman A, Guyatt GH, Singer J, et al. Agreement among reviewers of review articles. J Clin Epidemiol 1991;44:91-98.
12. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. Validation of an index of the quality of review articles. J Clin Epidemiol 1991;44:1271-1278.
13. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
14. Barnes DE, Bero LA. Scientific quality of original research articles on environmental tobacco smoke. Tob Control 1997;6:19-26.
15. Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of Clinical Research: Applications to Practice. 2nd ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Health, 2000.
16. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979;86:420-428.
17. Becser N, Sand T, Zwart J-A. Reliability of cephalic thermal thresholds in healthy subjects. Cephalalgia 1998;18:574-582.
18. Frank-Stromborg M, Olsen SJ, eds. Instruments for Clinical Health-Care Research. 3rd ed. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 2004.
19. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials: The CONSORT statement. JAMA 1996;276:637-639.
20. Moher D, Jones A, Lepage L. Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: A comparative before-and-after evaluation. JAMA 2001;285:1992-1995.