Assessing risk of bias in prevalence studies: Modification of an existing tool and evidence of interrater agreement

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 65, Issue 9, 2012, Pages 934-939

  Hoy, Damian ^a   Brooks, Peter ^b   Woolf, Anthony ^c   Blyth, Fiona ^d   March, Lyn ^d   Bain, Chris ^a   Baker, Peter ^a   Smith, Emma ^d   Buchbinder, Rachelle ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^b Australian Health Workforce Institute   (Australia)

^c PLYMOUTH UNIVERSITY PENINSULA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AND DENTISTRY   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^e MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Assessment; Bias; Instrument; Prevalence; Quality; Review

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; INTERRATER AGREEMENT; KAPPA STATISTICS; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC);

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); EPIDEMIOLOGIC STUDIES; HUMANS; LOW BACK PAIN; NECK PAIN; OBSERVER VARIATION; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 84864278222     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.11.014     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. D.M. Fox Evidence of evidence-based health policy: the politics of systematic reviews in coverage decisions Health Aff (Millwood) 24 2005 114 122
2. J. Lavis, H. Davies, A. Oxman, J.L. Denis, K. Golden-Biddle, and E. Ferlie Towards systematic reviews that inform health care management and policy-making J Health Serv Res Policy 10 2005 35 48
3. Higgins J, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0.: The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available at www.cochrane-handbook.org; Accessed August 24, 2011.
4. P. Katrak, A.E. Bialocerkowski, N. Massy-Westropp, S. Kumar, and K.A. Grimmer A systematic review of the content of critical appraisal tools BMC Med Res Methodol 4 2004 1 11
5. C. Mallen, G. Peat, and P. Croft Quality assessment of observational studies is not commonplace in systematic reviews J Clin Epidemiol 59 2006 765 769
6. T. Shamliyan, R.L. Kane, and S. Dickinson A systematic review of tools used to assess the quality of observational studies that examine incidence or prevalence and risk factors for diseases J Clin Epidemiol 63 2010 1061 1070
7. D. Hoy, L. March, P. Brooks, A. Woolf, F. Blyth, and T. Vos Measuring the global burden of low back pain Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 24 2 2010 155 165
8. C. Leboeuf-Yde, and J.M. Lauritsen The prevalence of low back pain in the literature. A structured review of 26 Nordic studies from 1954 to 1993 Spine 20 19 1995 2112 2118
9. B.F. Walker The prevalence of low back pain: a systematic review of the literature from 1966 to 1998 J Spinal Disord 13 3 2000 205 217
10. C.E. Dionne, K.M. Dunn, and P.R. Croft Does back pain prevalence really decrease with increasing age? A systematic review Age Ageing 35 2006 229 234
11. Q.A. Louw, L.D. Morris, and K. Grimmer-Somers The prevalence of low back pain in Africa: a systematic review BMC Musculoskelet Disord 8 2007 1 14
12. J.J. Deeks, J. Dinnes, R. D'Amico, A.J. Sowden, C. Sakarovitch, and F. Song Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies Health Technol Assess 7 2003 1 173
13. S.H. Downs, and N. Black The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions J Epidemiol Community Health 52 1998 377 384
14. G. Wells, B. Shea, D. O'Connell, J. Peterson, V. Welch, and M. Losos The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses 2008 University of Ottawa Ottawa, Canada
15. K. Khan, G. ter Riet, J. Glanville, A. Sowden, and J. Kleijnen Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care 2001 Centre for reviews and dissemination York, UK
16. P.L. Loney, and P.W. Stratford The prevalence of low back pain in adults: a methodological review of the literature Phys Ther 79 1999 384 396
17. Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality assessment tool for quantitative studies 2007 McMaster University Hamilton, Canada
18. A. Feinstein Principles of medical statistics 2002 Chapman and Hall/CRC Boca Raton, FL
19. J.R. Landis, and G.G. Koch The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data Biometrics 33 1 1977 159 174
20. J. Cohen Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit Psychol Bull 70 4 1968 213 220
21. Statacorp. STATA 10.1. TX.2009. http://www.stata.com/.
22. L. Terracciano, J. Brozek, E. Compalati, and H. Schunemann GRADE system: new paradigm Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 10 4 2010 377 383
23. E. von Elm, D.G. Altman, M. Egger, S.J. Pocock, P.C. Gotzsche, and J.P. Vandenbroucke The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies Ann Intern Med 147 2007 573 577
24. L. Tooth, R. Ware, C. Bain, D.M. Purdie, and A. Dobson Quality of reporting of observational longitudinal research Am J Epidemiol 161 2005 280 288
25. R. Fejer, K.O. Kyvik, and J. Hartvigsen The prevalence of neck pain in the world population: a systematic critical review of the literature Eur Spine J 15 6 2006 834 848
26. L. Maxwell, N. Santesso, P.S. Tugwell, G.A. Wells, M. Judd, and R. Buchbinder Method guidelines for Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group systematic reviews J Rheumatol 33 2006 2304 2311
27. D.F. Stroup, J.A. Berlin, S.C. Morton, I. Olkin, G.D. Williamson, and D. Rennie Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group JAMA 283 2000 2008 2012
28. T.A. Shamliyan, R.L. Kane, M.T. Ansari, G. Raman, N.D. Berkman, and M. Grant Development quality criteria to evaluate nontherapeutic studies of incidence, prevalence, or risk factors of chronic diseases: pilot study of new checklists J Clin Epidemiol 64 2011 637 657