Appendix FMcMaster Quality Assessment Scale of Harms (McHarm)

Publication Details

Rating

  • Were the harms PRE-DEFINED using standardized or precise definitions?
    • Yes
    • No
    • Unsure
  • Were SERIOUS events precisely defined?
    • Yes
    • No
    • Unsure
  • Were SEVERE events precisely defined?
    • Yes
    • No
    • Unsure
  • Were the number of DEATHS in each study group specified OR were the reason(s) for not specifying them given?
    • Yes
    • No
    • Unsure
  • Was the mode of harms collection specified as ACTIVE?
    • Yes
    • No
    • Unsure
  • Was the mode of harms collection specified as PASSIVE?
    • Yes
    • No
    • Unsure
  • Did the study specify WHO collected the harms?
    • Yes
    • No
    • Unsure
  • Did the study specify the TRAINING or BACKGROUND of who ascertained the harms?
    • Yes
    • No
    • Unsure
  • Did the study specify the TIMING and FREQUENCY of collection of the harms?
    • Yes
    • No
    • Unsure
  • Did the author(s) use STriamcinolone acetonide NDARD scale(s) or checklist(s) for harms collection?
    • Yes
    • No
    • Unsure
  • Did the authors specify if the harms reported encompass ALL the events collected or a selected SAMPLE?
    • Yes
    • No
    • Unsure
  • Was the NUMBER of participants that withdrew or were lost to follow-up specified for each study group?
    • Yes
    • No
    • Unsure
  • Was the TOTriamcinolone acetonide L NUMBER of participants affected by harms specified for each study arm?
    • Yes
    • No
    • Unsure
  • Did the author(s) specify the NUMBER for each TYPE of harmful event for each study group?
    • Yes
    • No
    • Unsure
  • Did the author(s) specify the type of analyses undertaken for harms data?
    • Yes
    • No
    • Unsure