Skip to main content

Table 2 Quality assessment for studies assessing interventions

From: Mechanical CPR devices compared to manual CPR during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and ambulance transport: a systematic review

LOE 1

Quality assessment for Randomized Controlled Trials

 

The seven factors included as the relevant quality items for RCTs are:

 

· Was the assignment of patients to treatment randomized?

 

· Was the randomization list concealed?

 

· Were all patients who entered the trial accounted for at its conclusion?

 

· Were the patients analyzed in the groups to which they were randomized?

 

· Were patients and clinicians "blinded" to which treatment was being received?

 

· Aside from the experimental treatment, were the groups treated equally?

 

· Were the groups similar at the start of the trial?

 

Quality assessment for meta-analyses of RCTs

 

The six factors included as the relevant quality items for meta-analyses are:

 

· Were specific objectives of the review stated (based on a specific clinical question in which patient, intervention, comparator, outcome (PICO) were specified)

 

· Was study design defined?

 

· Were selection criteria stated for studies to be included (based on trial design and methodological quality)?

 

· Were inclusive searches undertaken (using appropriately crafted search strategies)?

 

· Were characteristics and methodological quality of each trial identified?

 

· Were selection criteria applied and a log of excluded studies with reasons for exclusion reported?

LOE 2

Quality assessment for studies using concurrent controls without true randomization

 

The four factors included as the relevant quality items for these studies are:

 

· Were comparison groups clearly defined?

 

· Were outcomes measured in the same (preferably blinded), objective way in both groups?

 

· Were known confounders identified and appropriately controlled for?

 

· Was follow-up of patients sufficiently long and complete?

 

Quality assessment for meta-analyses of studies using concurrent controls without true randomization

 

The six factors included as the relevant quality items for meta-analyses are:

 

· Were specific objectives of the review stated (based on a specific clinical question in which patient, intervention, comparator, outcome (PICO) were specified)

 

· Was study design defined?

 

· Were selection criteria stated for studies to be included (based on trial design and methodological quality)?

 

· Were inclusive searches undertaken (using appropriately crafted search strategies)?

 

· Were characteristics and methodological quality of each trial identified?

 

· Were selection criteria applied and a log of excluded studies with reasons for exclusion reported?

LOE 3

Quality assessment for studies using retrospective controls:

 

The four factors included as the relevant quality items for these studies are:

 

· Were comparison groups clearly defined?

 

· Were outcomes measured in the same (preferably blinded), objective way in both groups?

 

· Were known confounders identified and appropriately controlled for?

 

· Was follow-up of patients sufficiently long and complete?

LOE 4

Quality assessment for case series

 

The three factors included as the relevant quality items for these studies are:

 

· Were outcomes measured in an objective way?

 

· Were known confounders identified and appropriately controlled for?

 

· Was follow-up of patients sufficiently long and complete?

LOE 5

Quality assessment for studies that are not directly related to the specific patient/population

 

LOE 5 studies are those not directly related to the specific patient/population (e.g. different patient/population, animal models, mechanical models etc.), and should have their methodological quality allocated to the methodology of the study. The relevant quality criteria here are:

 

· Good = randomized controlled trials (equivalent of LOE 1)

 

· Fair = studies without randomized controls (equivalent of LOE 2–3)

 

· Poor = studies without controls (equivalent of LOE 4).