Back to Blog
Retrospective chart review5/30/2023 Numbers of well-designed studies evaluation of strengths and limitations of Systematic literature search strategy reasonably consistent results, sufficient Organization, or government agency reasonably thorough and appropriate Search strategy consistent results with sufficient numbers of well-designed studies Ĭriteria-based evaluation of overall scientific strength and quality of included studiesĪnd definitive conclusions national expertise is clearly evident developed orī Good quality: Material officially sponsored by a professional, public, private Opinion of respected authorities and/or nationally recognizedĮxpert committees/consensus panels based on scientific evidenceĪ High quality: Material officially sponsored by a professional, public, private organization, or government agency documentation of a systematic literature Qualitative study or systematic review with or without a meta-synthesisĬ Low quality or major flaws: Little evidence with inconsistent results insufficient sample size for the study design conclusions cannot be drawn Systematic review of a combination of RCTs, quasi-experimental and non-experimental studies, or non-experimental studies only, with or without meta-analysis Systematic review of a combination of RCTs and quasi experimental, or quasi-experimental studies only, with or without meta-analysisī Good quality: Reasonably consistent results sufficient sample size for the study design some control, fairly definitive conclusions reasonably consistent recommendations based on fairly comprehensive literature review that includes Systematic review of RCTs, with or without meta-analysisĪ High quality: Consistent, generalizable results sufficient sample size for the study design adequate control definitive conclusions consistent recommendations based on comprehensive literature review that includes thorough reference to scientific evidence Experimental study, randomized controlled trial (RCT)
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |