Scales to Assess the Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review

By S. A. Olivo, L. Macedo, I. Gadotti, J. Fuentes, T. Stanton, D. Magee. Physical Therapy, 2008

835 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

How to Do a Systematic Review: A Best Practice Guide for Conducting and Reporting Narrative Reviews, Meta-Analyses, and Meta-Syntheses. (2019, background): “…the quality of nonrandomized studies alone, highlighting the lack of a single candidate tool for assessing the quality of observational epidemiological studies (Sanderson et al. 2007; see Olivo et al. 2008 for a systematic review of scales that assess the quality of randomized controlled trials).”
Assessing the Risk of Bias of Individual Studies in Systematic Reviews of Health Care Interventions (2012, background): “note that the default strategy in systematic reviews should be to consider including observational studies for evidence of benefit and the decision rests on the answer to two questions: (1) are there gaps in the trial evidence for the review questions under consideration? and (2) will observational ”
Assessment of study quality for systematic reviews: a comparison of the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool and the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool: methodological research. (2012, methodology): “The issue of subjectivity when evaluating quality of studies with different tools has been explored [8,11,12,48].”