Cargando…
Quality assessment with diverse studies (QuADS): an appraisal tool for methodological and reporting quality in systematic reviews of mixed- or multi-method studies
BACKGROUND: In the context of the volume of mixed- and multi-methods studies in health services research, the present study sought to develop an appraisal tool to determine the methodological and reporting quality of such studies when included in systematic reviews. Evaluative evidence regarding the...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7885606/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33588842 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06122-y |
_version_ | 1783651640161599488 |
---|---|
author | Harrison, Reema Jones, Benjamin Gardner, Peter Lawton, Rebecca |
author_facet | Harrison, Reema Jones, Benjamin Gardner, Peter Lawton, Rebecca |
author_sort | Harrison, Reema |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In the context of the volume of mixed- and multi-methods studies in health services research, the present study sought to develop an appraisal tool to determine the methodological and reporting quality of such studies when included in systematic reviews. Evaluative evidence regarding the design and use of our existing Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs (QATSDD) was synthesised to enhance and refine it for application across health services research. METHODS: Secondary data were collected through a literature review of all articles identified using Google Scholar that had cited the QATSDD tool from its inception in 2012 to December 2019. First authors of all papers that had cited the QATSDD (n=197) were also invited to provide further evaluative data via a qualitative online survey. Evaluative findings from the survey and literature review were synthesised narratively and these data used to identify areas requiring refinement. The refined tool was subject to inter-rater reliability, face and content validity analyses. RESULTS: Key limitations of the QATSDD tool identified related to a lack of clarity regarding scope of use of the tool and in the ease of application of criteria beyond experimental psychological research. The Quality Appraisal for Diverse Studies (QuADS) tool emerged as a revised tool to address the limitations of the QATSDD. The QuADS tool demonstrated substantial inter-rater reliability (k=0.66), face and content validity for application in systematic reviews with mixed, or multi-methods health services research. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the perceived value of appraisal tools to determine the methodological and reporting quality of studies in reviews that include heterogeneous studies. The QuADS tool demonstrates strong reliability and ease of use for application to multi or mixed-methods health services research. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-06122-y. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7885606 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78856062021-02-22 Quality assessment with diverse studies (QuADS): an appraisal tool for methodological and reporting quality in systematic reviews of mixed- or multi-method studies Harrison, Reema Jones, Benjamin Gardner, Peter Lawton, Rebecca BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: In the context of the volume of mixed- and multi-methods studies in health services research, the present study sought to develop an appraisal tool to determine the methodological and reporting quality of such studies when included in systematic reviews. Evaluative evidence regarding the design and use of our existing Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs (QATSDD) was synthesised to enhance and refine it for application across health services research. METHODS: Secondary data were collected through a literature review of all articles identified using Google Scholar that had cited the QATSDD tool from its inception in 2012 to December 2019. First authors of all papers that had cited the QATSDD (n=197) were also invited to provide further evaluative data via a qualitative online survey. Evaluative findings from the survey and literature review were synthesised narratively and these data used to identify areas requiring refinement. The refined tool was subject to inter-rater reliability, face and content validity analyses. RESULTS: Key limitations of the QATSDD tool identified related to a lack of clarity regarding scope of use of the tool and in the ease of application of criteria beyond experimental psychological research. The Quality Appraisal for Diverse Studies (QuADS) tool emerged as a revised tool to address the limitations of the QATSDD. The QuADS tool demonstrated substantial inter-rater reliability (k=0.66), face and content validity for application in systematic reviews with mixed, or multi-methods health services research. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the perceived value of appraisal tools to determine the methodological and reporting quality of studies in reviews that include heterogeneous studies. The QuADS tool demonstrates strong reliability and ease of use for application to multi or mixed-methods health services research. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-06122-y. BioMed Central 2021-02-15 /pmc/articles/PMC7885606/ /pubmed/33588842 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06122-y Text en © The Author(s) 2021, corrected publication [2021] https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Harrison, Reema Jones, Benjamin Gardner, Peter Lawton, Rebecca Quality assessment with diverse studies (QuADS): an appraisal tool for methodological and reporting quality in systematic reviews of mixed- or multi-method studies |
title | Quality assessment with diverse studies (QuADS): an appraisal tool for methodological and reporting quality in systematic reviews of mixed- or multi-method studies |
title_full | Quality assessment with diverse studies (QuADS): an appraisal tool for methodological and reporting quality in systematic reviews of mixed- or multi-method studies |
title_fullStr | Quality assessment with diverse studies (QuADS): an appraisal tool for methodological and reporting quality in systematic reviews of mixed- or multi-method studies |
title_full_unstemmed | Quality assessment with diverse studies (QuADS): an appraisal tool for methodological and reporting quality in systematic reviews of mixed- or multi-method studies |
title_short | Quality assessment with diverse studies (QuADS): an appraisal tool for methodological and reporting quality in systematic reviews of mixed- or multi-method studies |
title_sort | quality assessment with diverse studies (quads): an appraisal tool for methodological and reporting quality in systematic reviews of mixed- or multi-method studies |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7885606/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33588842 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06122-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT harrisonreema qualityassessmentwithdiversestudiesquadsanappraisaltoolformethodologicalandreportingqualityinsystematicreviewsofmixedormultimethodstudies AT jonesbenjamin qualityassessmentwithdiversestudiesquadsanappraisaltoolformethodologicalandreportingqualityinsystematicreviewsofmixedormultimethodstudies AT gardnerpeter qualityassessmentwithdiversestudiesquadsanappraisaltoolformethodologicalandreportingqualityinsystematicreviewsofmixedormultimethodstudies AT lawtonrebecca qualityassessmentwithdiversestudiesquadsanappraisaltoolformethodologicalandreportingqualityinsystematicreviewsofmixedormultimethodstudies |