Using quality assessment tools to critically appraise ageing research: a guide for clinicians

被引:66
作者
Harrison, Jennifer Kirsty [1 ,2 ]
Reid, James [3 ]
Quinn, Terry J. [4 ]
Shenkin, Susan Deborah [5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Edinburgh, Ctr Cognit Ageing & Cognit Epidemiol, Edinburgh, Midlothian, Scotland
[2] Alzheimer Scotland Dementia Res Ctr, Edinburgh, Midlothian, Scotland
[3] Queen Elizabeth Univ Hosp, Med Elderly, Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
[4] Univ Glasgow, Inst Cardiovasc & Med Sci, Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
[5] Univ Edinburgh, Dept Clin & Surg Sci, Geriatr Med, Edinburgh, Midlothian, Scotland
[6] Univ Edinburgh, Ctr Cognit Ageing & Cognit Epidemiol, Edinburgh, Midlothian, Scotland
基金
英国生物技术与生命科学研究理事会; 英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
quality; assessment; methodology; reporting; critical appraisal; older people; NEWCASTLE-OTTAWA SCALE; EPIDEMIOLOGY; RELIABILITY; DELIRIUM; RISK; BIAS;
D O I
10.1093/ageing/afw223
中图分类号
R592 [老年病学]; C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ; 100203 ;
摘要
Evidence based medicine tells us that we should not accept published research at face value. Even research from established teams published in the highest impact journals can have methodological flaws, biases and limited generalisability. The critical appraisal of research studies can seem daunting, but tools are available to make the process easier for the non-specialist. Understanding the language and process of quality assessment is essential when considering or conducting research, and is also valuable for all clinicians who use published research to inform their clinical practice. We present a review written specifically for the practising geriatrician. This considers how quality is defined in relation to the methodological conduct and reporting of research. Having established why quality assessment is important, we present and critique tools which are available to standardise quality assessment. We consider five study designs: RCTs, non-randomised studies, observational studies, systematic reviews and diagnostic test accuracy studies. Quality assessment for each of these study designs is illustrated with an example of published cognitive research. The practical applications of the tools are highlighted, with guidance on their strengths and limitations. We signpost educational resources and offer specific advice for use of these tools. We hope that all geriatricians become comfortable with critical appraisal of published research and that use of the tools described in this review - along with awareness of their strengths and limitations - become a part of teaching, journal clubs and practice.
引用
收藏
页码:359 / 365
页数:7
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], ENH QUAL TRANSP HLTH
[2]  
[Anonymous], HLTH TECHNOL ASSESS
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2022, COCHRANE HDB SYSTEMA
[4]  
[Anonymous], SEL APPR REP GUID YO
[5]  
[Anonymous], COCHRANE METHODS BIA
[6]  
[Anonymous], COCHR HDB SYST REV I
[7]  
[Anonymous], HOW TO READ A PAPER
[8]  
[Anonymous], GRADEPRO GUID DEV TO
[9]  
[Anonymous], 2013, Cochrane Database Syst Rev, DOI [DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD010460, 10.1002/14651858.CD010460]
[10]  
[Anonymous], 2013, CASP CHECKL