Western Journal of Nursing Research

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Saunders, L. D.
Right arrow Articles by Raina, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Saunders, L. D.
Right arrow Articles by Raina, P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Western Journal of Nursing Research, Vol. 25, No. 2, 223-237 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/0193945902250039

Assessing the Methodological Quality of Nonrandomized Intervention Studies

L. Duncan Saunders

G. Mustafa Soomro

Jeanette Buckingham

Gro Jamtvedt

Parminder Raina

In many areas of health care, randomized controlled trials (the best evidence regarding the effectiveness of health care interventions) are lacking and decision-makers have to rely on evidence from nonrandomized studies (NRS). We conducted a Medline search to identify English-language articles describing instruments for assessing the quality of NRS of health care interventions. These instruments varied greatly in scope, in the number and types of items and in developmental rigor. Items commonly included were those related to specification of study questions, allocation method, comparability of groups, and blinding of outcome assessment. We do not support the development of a generic scale to evaluate the methodological quality of nonrandomized intervention studies. Instead, further study should be directed to investigate the degree to which, and the circumstances under which, different methodological characteristics are associated with bias. This information will assist researchers in identifying a priori which methodological characteristics need careful evaluation in particular studies.

Key Words: systematic reviews • nonrandomized studies • validity


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JAMAHome page
C. H. MacLean, S. J. Newberry, W. A. Mojica, P. Khanna, A. M. Issa, M. J. Suttorp, Y.-W. Lim, S. B. Traina, L. Hilton, R. Garland, et al.
Effects of Omega-3 Fatty Acids on Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review
JAMA, January 25, 2006; 295(4): 403 - 415.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ANN INTERN MEDHome page
R. Chou and M. Helfand
Challenges in Systematic Reviews That Assess Treatment Harms
Ann Intern Med, June 21, 2005; 142(12_Part_2): 1090 - 1099.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]