Language:

No clear choice between Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies to assess methodological quality in cross-sectional studies of health-related quality of life and breast cancer

Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2020-04, Vol.120, p.94-103 [Peer Reviewed Journal]

2019 Elsevier Inc. ;Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. ;2019. Elsevier Inc. ;ISSN: 0895-4356 ;EISSN: 1878-5921 ;DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.12.013 ;PMID: 31866469

Full text available

Citations Cited by

Actions
1. Add to My Research
2. Remove from My Research
3. E-mail
4. Print
5. Permalink
6. Citation
7. EasyBib
8. EndNote
9. RefWorks
10. Delicious
11. Export RIS
12. Export BibTeX

Title:
No clear choice between Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies to assess methodological quality in cross-sectional studies of health-related quality of life and breast cancer
Author: Moskalewicz, Alexandra ; Oremus, Mark
Subjects: Appraisal tool for cross-sectional studies ; Awards & honors ; Breast cancer ; Breast Neoplasms - psychology ; Completion time ; Correlation coefficient ; Correlation coefficients ; Cross-sectional ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Female ; Health-related quality of life ; Humans ; Impact factors ; Newcastle–Ottawa scale ; Observer Variation ; Quality assessment ; Quality of life ; Quality of Life - psychology ; Quantitative psychology ; Reliability ; Reproducibility of Results ; Research - standards ; Studies ; Validity
Is Part Of: Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2020-04, Vol.120, p.94-103
Description: The aim of the study was to compare the inter-rater reliability, concurrent validity, completion time, and ease of use of two methodological quality (MQ) assessment tools for cross-sectional studies: an adapted Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies (AXIS). Two raters applied the NOS and AXIS to 63 cross-sectional studies of health-related quality of life and breast cancer. AXIS demonstrated poor inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.49) and required more than double the amount of time to complete compared with the NOS, which demonstrated moderate reliability (ICC = 0.73). For concurrent validity, weak and moderate positive relationships existed between NOS and AXIS (rater 1: r = 0.26; rater 2: r = 0.45). Ease of using the tools was affected by the indirectness of MQ assessments, perceived thoroughness of the tools’ content, and user experience. This study was the first to assess the psychometric properties of a cross-sectional NOS and AXIS. The results did not support a clear choice between selecting either tool for evaluating MQ in cross-sectional studies.
Publisher: United States: Elsevier Inc
Language: English
Identifier: ISSN: 0895-4356
EISSN: 1878-5921
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.12.013
PMID: 31866469
Source: AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central
MEDLINE

Back to results list


INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY	(84-028) 37 755 057	Feedback
19 Nguyen Huu Tho St. Dist.7, HCM	thuvien@tdtu.edu.vn	Feedback

No clear choice between Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies to assess methodological quality in cross-sectional studies of health-related quality of life and breast cancer

2019 Elsevier Inc. ;Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. ;2019. Elsevier Inc. ;ISSN: 0895-4356 ;EISSN: 1878-5921 ;DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.12.013 ;PMID: 31866469

Searching Remote Databases, Please Wait