Erschienen in:
01.09.2010 | Commentary
Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses
verfasst von:
Andreas Stang
Erschienen in:
European Journal of Epidemiology
|
Ausgabe 9/2010
Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten
Excerpt
The quality assessment of non-randomized studies is an important component of a thorough meta-analysis of non-randomized studies. Low quality studies can lead to a distortion of the summary effect estimate. Recent guidelines for the reporting of meta-analyses of observational studies recommend the assessment of the study quality (MOOSE) [
1]. In principal, three categories of quality assessments tools are available: scales, simple checklists, or checklists with a summary judgment (for details see Sanderson et al. 2007 [
2]). The results of the quality assessment can be used in several ways such as forming inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis, informing a sensitivity analysis or meta-regression, weighting studies, or highlighting areas of methodological quality poorly addressed by the included studies [
3]. It has been criticized that the use of summary scores involve inherent weighting of component items including items that may not be related to the validity of the study findings [
2]. …