Methodological quality and synthesis of case series and case reports

By M. H. Murad, S. Sultan, S. Haffar, F. Bazerbachi. BMJ evidence-based medicine, 2018

1,957 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Case reports and case series are uncontrolled study designs known for increased risk of bias but have profoundly influenced the medical literature and continue to advance our knowledge. In this guide, we present a framework for appraisal, synthesis and application of evidence derived from case reports and case series. We propose a tool to evaluate the methodological quality of case reports and case series based on the domains of selection, ascertainment, causality and reporting and provide signalling questions to aid evidence-based practitioners and systematic reviewers in their assessment. We suggest using evidence derived from case reports and case series to inform decision-making when no other higher level of evidence is available.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/097e5700fbedb8f66691358575c9b7d6f338e9b0

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

1. Z. Munn
2. Catalin Tufanaru
3. Sandeep Moola

In Statistics and Probability

1. Z. Munn
2. Cindy Stern
3. Catalin Tufanaru
4. E. Aromataris
5. Sandeep Moola

Citations in the corpus

• Outcome of coronavirus spectrum infections (SARS, MERS, COVID-19) during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2020, methodology): “A study can be awarded a maximum of 1 star for each numbered item within the selection and reporting categories, 2 stars for ascertainment, and 4 stars for comparability.(15) Given emergency need for this guidance, Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, registration was not sought.”
• Thromboembolism risk of COVID-19 is high and associated with a higher risk of mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis (2020, positive): “The methodological quality of the non-comparative studies was assessed with a tool for evaluating the methodological quality of case reports and case series [13], whereas that of comparative studies was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa tool [14].”
• Methodological quality of case series studies: an introduction to the JBI critical appraisal tool (2019, background): “Although case series are not traditionally included in systematic reviews assessing the effectiveness of an intervention or therapy, they have contributed greatly to the medical literature and can offer valuable information relating to the benefits and harms of certain treatments.(5,6) As such, case”