Suppr超能文献

开发用于对男男性行为者中艾滋病毒流行率及相关风险行为的观察性研究进行系统评价的质量评估工具(QATSO)。

Development of a quality assessment tool for systematic reviews of observational studies (QATSO) of HIV prevalence in men having sex with men and associated risk behaviours.

作者信息

Wong William C W, Cheung Catherine S K, Hart Graham J

机构信息

Department of General Practice, 200 Berkeley Street, Carlton, VIC 3053, Australia.

出版信息

Emerg Themes Epidemiol. 2008 Nov 17;5:23. doi: 10.1186/1742-7622-5-23.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews based on the critical appraisal of observational and analytic studies on HIV prevalence and risk factors for HIV transmission among men having sex with men are very useful for health care decisions and planning. Such appraisal is particularly difficult, however, as the quality assessment tools available for use with observational and analytic studies are poorly established.

METHODS

We reviewed the existing quality assessment tools for systematic reviews of observational studies and developed a concise quality assessment checklist to help standardise decisions regarding the quality of studies, with careful consideration of issues such as external and internal validity.

RESULTS

A pilot version of the checklist was developed based on epidemiological principles, reviews of study designs, and existing checklists for the assessment of observational studies. The Quality Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews of Observational Studies (QATSO) Score consists of five items: External validity (1 item), reporting (2 items), bias (1 item) and confounding factors (1 item). Expert opinions were sought and it was tested on manuscripts that fulfil the inclusion criteria of a systematic review. Like all assessment scales, QATSO may oversimplify and generalise information yet it is inclusive, simple and practical to use, and allows comparability between papers.

CONCLUSION

A specific tool that allows researchers to appraise and guide study quality of observational studies is developed and can be modified for similar studies in the future.

摘要

背景

基于对男男性行为者中艾滋病毒流行率及艾滋病毒传播风险因素的观察性和分析性研究进行严格评估的系统评价,对于医疗保健决策和规划非常有用。然而,由于可用于观察性和分析性研究的质量评估工具尚不完善,这种评估尤其困难。

方法

我们回顾了现有的用于观察性研究系统评价的质量评估工具,并制定了一份简明的质量评估清单,以帮助规范有关研究质量的决策,同时仔细考虑外部和内部效度等问题。

结果

该清单的试行版基于流行病学原理、研究设计综述以及现有的观察性研究评估清单而制定。观察性研究系统评价质量评估工具(QATSO)评分包括五个项目:外部效度(1项)、报告(2项)、偏倚(1项)和混杂因素(1项)。我们征求了专家意见,并在符合系统评价纳入标准的手稿上进行了测试。与所有评估量表一样,QATSO可能会过度简化和概括信息,但它具有包容性、使用简单且实用,并且能够实现论文之间的可比性。

结论

开发了一种特定工具,使研究人员能够评估和指导观察性研究的质量,并且未来可针对类似研究进行修改。

相似文献

4
6
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.

引用本文的文献

8
Body awareness disturbances in patients with low back pain: a systematic review.腰痛患者的身体感知障碍:一项系统综述
Acta Neurol Belg. 2024 Oct;124(5):1477-1487. doi: 10.1007/s13760-024-02554-5. Epub 2024 May 1.

本文引用的文献

4
MSM and HIV/AIDS in China.中国的男男性行为者与艾滋病毒/艾滋病
Cell Res. 2005 Nov-Dec;15(11-12):858-64. doi: 10.1038/sj.cr.7290359.
7
Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies.评估非随机干预研究。
Health Technol Assess. 2003;7(27):iii-x, 1-173. doi: 10.3310/hta7270.
8
Systematic reviews of evaluations of prognostic variables.预后变量评估的系统评价。
BMJ. 2001 Jul 28;323(7306):224-8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7306.224.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验