Identifying Items to Assess Methodological Quality in Physical Therapy Trials: A Factor Analysis

被引:17
作者
Armijo-Olivo, Susan [1 ]
Cummings, Greta G. [2 ]
Fuentes, Jorge [3 ,4 ]
Saltaji, Humam [5 ]
Ha, Christine [6 ]
Chisholm, Annabritt [7 ]
Pasichnyk, Dion [8 ]
Rogers, Todd [9 ]
机构
[1] Univ Alberta, Fac Rehabil Med, Dept Phys Therapy, CLEAR Connecting Leadership & Res Outcomes Res Pr, Edmonton, AB T6G 2G4, Canada
[2] Univ Alberta, Edmonton Clin Hlth Acad, CLEAR Outcomes Res Program, Edmonton, AB T6G 2G4, Canada
[3] Univ Alberta, Fac Rehabil Med, Dept Phys Therapy, Edmonton, AB T6G 2G4, Canada
[4] Catholic Univ Maule, Dept Phys Therapy, Talca, Chile
[5] Univ Alberta, Sch Dent, Fac Med & Dent, Orthodont Grad Program, Edmonton, AB T6G 2G4, Canada
[6] Univ Alberta, Fac Rehabil Med, Rehabil Res Ctr, Edmonton, AB T6G 2G4, Canada
[7] Univ Alberta, Fac Med & Dent, Dept Pediat, Alberta Res Ctr Hlth Evidence, Edmonton, AB T6G 2G4, Canada
[8] Univ Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2G4, Canada
[9] Univ Alberta, Ctr Res Appl Measurement & Evaluat, Edmonton, AB T6G 2G4, Canada
来源
PHYSICAL THERAPY | 2014年 / 94卷 / 09期
关键词
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIALS; CLINICAL-TRIALS; EMPIRICAL-EVIDENCE; BIAS; TOOL; IMPACT; METAANALYSES; SPONSORSHIP; CONCLUSIONS; INTENTION;
D O I
10.2522/ptj.20130464
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background. Numerous tools and individual items have been proposed to assess the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The frequency of use of these items varies according to health area, which suggests a lack of agreement regarding their relevance to trial quality or risk of bias. Objective. The objectives of this study were: (1) to identify the underlying component structure of items and (2) to determine relevant items to evaluate the quality and risk of bias of trials in physical therapy by using an exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Design. A methodological research design was used, and an EFA was performed. Methods. Randomized controlled trials used for this study were randomly selected from searches of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Two reviewers used 45 items gathered from 7 different quality tools to assess the methodological quality of the RCTs. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted using the principal axis factoring (PAF) method followed by varimax rotation. Results. Principal axis factoring identified 34 items loaded on 9 common factors: (1) selection bias; (2) performance and detection bias; (3) eligibility, intervention details, and description of outcome measures; (4) psychometric properties of the main outcome; (5) contamination and adherence to treatment; (6) attrition bias; (7) data analysis; (8) sample size; and (9) control and placebo adequacy. Limitation. Because of the exploratory nature of the results, a confirmatory factor analysis is needed to validate this model. Conclusions. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first factor analysis to explore the underlying component items used to evaluate the methodological quality or risk of bias of RCTs in physical therapy. The items and factors represent a starting point for evaluating the methodological quality and risk of bias in physical therapy trials. Empirical evidence of the association among these items with treatment effects and a confirmatory factor analysis of these results are needed to validate these items.
引用
收藏
页码:1272 / 1284
页数:13
相关论文
共 38 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2009, BMJ
[2]  
[Anonymous], COCHRANE HDB SYSTEMA
[3]  
[Anonymous], POS STAT STAND PHYS
[4]  
[Anonymous], BMJ
[5]   Inconsistency in the items included in tools used in general health research and physical therapy to evaluate the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials: a descriptive analysis [J].
Armijo-Olivo, Susan ;
Fuentes, Jorge ;
Ospina, Maria ;
Saltaji, Humam ;
Hartling, Lisa .
BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2013, 13
[6]   Intention to treat analysis, compliance, drop-outs and how to deal with missing data in clinical research: a review [J].
Armijo-Olivo, Susan ;
Warren, Sharon ;
Magee, David .
PHYSICAL THERAPY REVIEWS, 2009, 14 (01) :36-49
[7]   Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research - A systematic review [J].
Bekelman, JE ;
Li, Y ;
Gross, CP .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2003, 289 (04) :454-465
[8]   Ensuring the comparability of comparison groups: is randomization enough? [J].
Berger, VW ;
Weinstein, S .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 2004, 25 (05) :515-524
[9]   A general critical appraisal tool: An evaluation of construct validity [J].
Crowe, Michael ;
Sheppard, Lorraine .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NURSING STUDIES, 2011, 48 (12) :1505-1516
[10]   Reviews assessing the quality or the reporting of randomized controlled trials are increasing over time but raised questions about how quality is assessed [J].
Dechartres, Agnes ;
Charles, Pierre ;
Hopewell, Sally ;
Ravaud, Philippe ;
Altman, Douglas G. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2011, 64 (02) :136-144