| Overall Quality Rating |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Relevance Questions
|
|
1. Would implementing the studied intervention or procedure (if found successful) result in improved outcomes for the patients/clients/population group? (Not Applicable for some epidemiological studies) |
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
|
|
|
2. Did the authors study an outcome (dependent variable) or topic that the patients/clients/population group would care about? |
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
|
|
|
3. Is the focus of the intervention or procedure (independent variable) or topic of study a common issue of concern to nutrition or dietetics practice? |
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
|
|
|
4. Is the intervention or procedure feasible? (NA for some epidemiological studies) |
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Validity Questions
|
|
1. Was the research question clearly stated? |
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
|
|
|
2. Was the selection of study subjects/patients free from bias? |
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
|
|
|
3. Were study groups comparable? |
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
|
|
|
4. Was method of handling withdrawals described? |
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
|
|
|
5. Was blinding used to prevent introduction of bias? |
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
6. Were intervention/therapeutic regimens/exposure factor or procedure and any comparison(s) described in detail? Were interveningfactors described? |
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
|
|
|
7. Were outcomes clearly defined and the measurements valid and reliable? |
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
|
|
|
8. Was the statistical analysis appropriate for the study design and type of outcome indicators? |
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
|
|
|
9. Are conclusions supported by results with biases and limitations taken into consideration? |
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
|
|
|
10. Is bias due to study’s funding or sponsorship unlikely? |
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
Research Design and Implementation Checklist: Review Articles
|
| |
Harland et al. 2008
|
Liao et al 2007
|
Pan et al 2008
|
Reynolds et al. 2006
|
Weggemans RM and Trautwein EA, 2003
|
Zhan and Ho 2005
|
| Overall Quality Rating |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Relevance Questions
|
|
1. Will the answer if true, have a direct bearing on the health of patients? |
Yes
|
|
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
2. Is the outcome or topic something that patients/clients/population groups would care about? |
Yes
|
|
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
3. Is the problem addressed in the review one that is relevant to nutrition or dietetics practice? |
Yes
|
|
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
4. Will the information, if true, require a change in practice? |
Yes
|
|
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
| |
|
Validity Questions
|
|
1. Was the question for the review clearly focused and appropriate? |
Yes
|
|
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
2. Was the search strategy used to locate relevant studies comprehensive? Were the databases searched and the search termsused described? |
Yes
|
|
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
3. Were explicit methods used to select studies to include in the review? Were inclusion/exclusion criteria specified and appropriate? Were selection methods unbiased? |
Yes
|
|
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
4. Was there an appraisal of the quality and validity of studies included in the review? Were appraisal methods specified, appropriate, and reproducible? |
Yes
|
|
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
5. Were specific treatments/interventions/exposures described? Were treatments similar enough to be combined? |
Yes
|
|
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
6. Was the outcome of interest clearly indicated? Were other potential harms and benefits considered? |
Yes
|
|
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
7. Were processes for data abstraction, synthesis, and analysis described? Were they applied consistently across studies and groups? Was there appropriate use of qualitative and/or quantitative synthesis? Was variation in findings among studies analyzed? Were heterogeneity issued considered? If data from studies were aggregated for meta-analysis, was the procedure described? |
Yes
|
|
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
8. Are the results clearly presented in narrative and/or quantitative terms? If summary statistics are used, are levels of significance and/or confidence intervals included? |
Yes
|
|
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
9. Are conclusions supported by results with biases and limitations taken into consideration? Are limitations of the review identified and discussed? |
Yes
|
|
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
10. Was bias due to the review’s funding or sponsorship unlikely? |
Yes
|
|
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
| |
| |
