NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

O'Neil ME, Freeman M, Christensen V, et al. A Systematic Evidence Review of Non-pharmacological Interventions for Behavioral Symptoms of Dementia [Internet]. Washington (DC): Department of Veterans Affairs; 2011 Mar.

Cover of A Systematic Evidence Review of Non-pharmacological Interventions for Behavioral Symptoms of Dementia

A Systematic Evidence Review of Non-pharmacological Interventions for Behavioral Symptoms of Dementia [Internet].

Show details

APPENDIX DQUALITY RATING CRITERIA FOR SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS*

Overall quality rating for each systematic review is based on the below questions. Ratings are summarized as: Good, Fair, or Poor:

  • Search dates reported? Yes or No
  • Search methods reported? Yes or No
  • Comprehensive search? Yes or No
  • Inclusion criteria reported? Yes or No
  • Selection bias avoided? Yes or No
  • Validity criteria reported? Yes or No
  • Validity assessed appropriately? Yes or No
  • Methods used to combine studies reported? Yes or No
  • Findings combined appropriately? Yes or No
  • Conclusions supported by data? Yes or No

Definitions of ratings based on above criteria

Good: Meet all criteria: Reports comprehensive and reproducible search methods and results; reports pre-defined criteria to select studies, and reports reasons for excluding potentially relevant studies; adequately evaluates quality of included studies and incorporates assessments of quality when synthesizing data; reports methods for synthesizing data and uses appropriate methods to combine data qualitatively or quantitatively; conclusions supported by the evidence reviewed.

Fair: Studies will be graded fair if they fail to meet one or more of the above criteria, but the limitations are not judged as being major.

Poor: Studies will be graded poor if they have a major limitation in one or more of the above criteria.

Created from the following publications:

Harris RP, Helfand M, Woolf SH, et al. Current methods of the US Preventive Services Task Force: a review of the process. Am J Prev Med. 2001:20(3S); 21-35.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. The Guidelines Manual. London: Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2006.

Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. Validation of an index of the quality of review articles. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991; 44:1271-8.

Footnotes

*

Created from the following publications:

Harris RP, Helfand M, Woolf SH, et al. Current methods of the US Preventive Services Task Force: a review of the process. Am J Prev Med. 2001:20(3S); 21-35.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. The Guidelines Manual. London: Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2006.

Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. Validation of an index of the quality of review articles. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991; 44:1271-8.

PubReader format: click here to try

Views

  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (1.5M)

Other titles in this collection

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...