Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://olympias.lib.uoi.gr/jspui/handle/123456789/22751
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBalk, E. M.en
dc.contributor.authorBonis, P. A.en
dc.contributor.authorMoskowitz, H.en
dc.contributor.authorSchmid, C. H.en
dc.contributor.authorIoannidis, J. P.en
dc.contributor.authorWang, C.en
dc.contributor.authorLau, J.en
dc.date.accessioned2015-11-24T19:26:41Z-
dc.date.available2015-11-24T19:26:41Z-
dc.identifier.issn0098-7484-
dc.identifier.urihttps://olympias.lib.uoi.gr/jspui/handle/123456789/22751-
dc.rightsDefault Licence-
dc.subject*Data Interpretation, Statisticalen
dc.subject*Meta-Analysis as Topicen
dc.subjectQuality Controlen
dc.subjectRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic/*standards/statistics & numerical dataen
dc.subjectResearch Designen
dc.subject*Treatment Outcomeen
dc.titleCorrelation of quality measures with estimates of treatment effect in meta-analyses of randomized controlled trialsen
heal.typejournalArticle-
heal.type.enJournal articleen
heal.type.elΆρθρο Περιοδικούel
heal.identifier.secondaryhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12052127-
heal.languageen-
heal.accesscampus-
heal.recordProviderΠανεπιστήμιο Ιωαννίνων. Σχολή Επιστημών Υγείας. Τμήμα Ιατρικήςel
heal.publicationDate2002-
heal.abstractCONTEXT: Specific features of trial quality may be associated with exaggeration or shrinking of the observed treatment effect in randomized studies. Therefore, assessment of trial quality is often used in meta-analysis. However, the degree to which specific quality measures are associated with treatment effects has not been well established across a broad range of clinical areas. OBJECTIVE: To determine if quality measures are associated with treatment effect size in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). DESIGN: Quality measures from published quality assessment scales were evaluated in RCTs included in meta-analyses from 4 medical areas (cardiovascular disease, infectious disease, pediatrics, and surgery). Included meta-analyses incorporated at least 6 RCTs, examined dichotomous outcomes, and demonstrated significant between-study heterogeneity in the odds ratio (OR) scale. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Relative ORs comparing overall treatment effect (summary OR) of high vs low-quality studies, as determined by each quality measure, with relative ORs less than 1 indicating larger treatment effect in low-quality studies. RESULTS: Twenty-four quality measures were analyzed for 276 RCTs from 26 meta-analyses. Relative ORs of high vs low-quality studies for these quality measures ranged from 0.83 to 1.26; none was statistically significantly associated with treatment effect. The proportion of studies fulfilling specific quality measures varied widely in the 4 medical areas. In analyses limited to specific medical areas, placebo control, multicenter studies, study country, caregiver blinding, and statistical methods were significantly associated with treatment effect on 7 occasions. These relative ORs ranged from 0.40 to 1.74. However, the directions of these associations were not consistent. CONCLUSIONS: Individual quality measures are not reliably associated with the strength of treatment effect across studies and medical areas. Although use of specific quality measures may be appropriate in specific well-defined areas in which there is pertinent evidence, findings of associations with treatment effect cannot be generalized to all clinical areas or meta-analyses.en
heal.journalNameJAMAen
heal.journalTypepeer-reviewed-
heal.fullTextAvailabilityTRUE-
Appears in Collections:Άρθρα σε επιστημονικά περιοδικά ( Ανοικτά) - ΙΑΤ

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons