USDA Evidence Library

Nutrition Evidence Library

HOME

CONTACT

ABOUT

HELP

Quality Rating Summary

Research Design and Implementation Checklist: Primary Research
	Albert CM, Campos H et al, 2002	Brouwer IA, Heeringa J et al, 2006	Bucher HC, Hengstler P et al 2002	Erkkila AT, Lehto S et al, 2003	Erkkilä, Lichtenstein etal 2004	Erkkilä, Matthan et al, 2006	Folsom and Demissie, 2004	Frost L and Vestergaard P, 2005	He K, Song Y et al, 2004	Iso H, Kobayashi M et al, 2006	Jarvinen R, Knekt P et al, 2006	Konig A, Bouzan C et al, 2005	Lankinen et al 2009	Lara JJ, Economou M et al, 2007	Lemaitre RN, King IB et al, 2003	Lindqvist et al 2009	Mozaffarian 2008	Mozaffarian D, Ascherio A et al, 2005	Mozaffarian D, Psaty BM et al, 2004	Mozaffarian D, Rimm EB 2006	Panagiotakos et al 2007	Seierstad et al 2005	Streppel et al 2008	Turunen et al 2008	Virtanen et al 2008	Virtanen JK, Mursu J et al, 2009	Wang et al 2006	Whelton et al 2004	Yamagishi et al 2008
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		Yes	Yes	Yes	N/A	Yes		Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes		N/A	Yes	N/A	Yes	N/A				N/A
2. Did the authors study an outcome (dependent variable) or topic that the patients/clients/population group would care about?	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	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		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes				Yes
4. Is the intervention or procedure feasible? (NA for some epidemiological studies)	Yes	Yes		N/A	Yes	Yes	N/A	Yes		N/A	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes		N/A	Yes	N/A	Yes	N/A				N/A

Validity Questions
1. Was the research question clearly stated?	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes				Yes
2. Was the selection of study subjects/patients free from bias?	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes		???	N/A	Yes	???		???	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	???				Yes
3. Were study groups comparable?	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes		???	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	N/A	Yes				Yes
4. Was method of handling withdrawals described?	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes		Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	???	Yes	Yes				Yes
5. Was blinding used to prevent introduction of bias?	Yes	Yes		N/A	Yes	Yes	No	Yes		Yes	N/A		Yes	No	Yes	Yes		No	No		Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes				Yes
6. Were intervention/therapeutic regimens/exposure factor or procedure and any comparison(s) described in detail? Were interveningfactors described?	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes		Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	???		N/A	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes				Yes
7. Were outcomes clearly defined and the measurements valid and reliable?	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes		Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	???	Yes				Yes
8. Was the statistical analysis appropriate for the study design and type of outcome indicators?	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	???	Yes				Yes
9. Are conclusions supported by results with biases and limitations taken into consideration?	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes		Yes	N/A	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes				Yes
10. Is bias due to study’s funding or sponsorship unlikely?	Yes	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	???		Yes	???		Yes	???	Yes	???		No	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes				Yes


Research Design and Implementation Checklist: Review Articles
	Albert CM, Campos H et al, 2002	Brouwer IA, Heeringa J et al, 2006	Bucher HC, Hengstler P et al 2002	Erkkila AT, Lehto S et al, 2003	Erkkilä, Lichtenstein etal 2004	Erkkilä, Matthan et al, 2006	Folsom and Demissie, 2004	Frost L and Vestergaard P, 2005	He K, Song Y et al, 2004	Iso H, Kobayashi M et al, 2006	Jarvinen R, Knekt P et al, 2006	Konig A, Bouzan C et al, 2005	Lankinen et al 2009	Lara JJ, Economou M et al, 2007	Lemaitre RN, King IB et al, 2003	Lindqvist et al 2009	Mozaffarian 2008	Mozaffarian D, Ascherio A et al, 2005	Mozaffarian D, Psaty BM et al, 2004	Mozaffarian D, Rimm EB 2006	Panagiotakos et al 2007	Seierstad et al 2005	Streppel et al 2008	Turunen et al 2008	Virtanen et al 2008	Virtanen JK, Mursu J et al, 2009	Wang et al 2006	Whelton et al 2004	Yamagishi et al 2008
Overall Quality Rating
Relevance Questions
1. Will the answer if true, have a direct bearing on the health of patients?			Yes						Yes			Yes					Yes			Yes							Yes	Yes
2. Is the outcome or topic something that patients/clients/population groups would care about?			Yes						Yes			Yes					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			Yes							Yes	Yes
4. Will the information, if true, require a change in practice?			Yes						Yes			Yes					Yes			Yes							Yes	Yes

Validity Questions
1. Was the question for the review clearly focused and appropriate?			Yes						Yes			Yes					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			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			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					No			Yes							Yes	Yes
5. Were specific treatments/interventions/exposures described? Were treatments similar enough to be combined?			Yes						Yes			Yes					Yes			???							Yes	Yes
6. Was the outcome of interest clearly indicated? Were other potential harms and benefits considered?			Yes						N/A			Yes					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							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			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			Yes							Yes	Yes
10. Was bias due to the review’s funding or sponsorship unlikely?			Yes						Yes			Yes					Yes			Yes							Yes	Yes