Article type
Year
Abstract
Background:
Systematic reviews are a cornerstone in biomedical research and evidence-based medicine. In order to acquire high level systematic reviews, adequate assessment of the methodological quality of included studies is important. In the last decades an increasing number of molecular systematic reviews were published. However, till date no standardized quality assessment checklists are available for molecular studies.
Objectives:
We aim to develop a tool for the quality assessment of molecular studies.
Methods:
Items of previously undertaken reviews were used to set up an initial list of items. A literature search was conduced to complete this list. We organised a panel to discuss which of these items should be included in the quality assessment. After consensus was reached, the items were assessed by ten experts in the field using a web-based survey, this procedure is called a Delphi procedure. The development is partially iterative, resulting in an improved version after each iterative cycle. Members of this expert panel were experienced in molecular markers studies.
Results:
We expect that after three rounds consensus will be reached and that the initial list of 17 items will than be shortened to 14 items in the final version. We have named the tool 'Critical Appraisal of Molecular Marker Studies' (CAMMS). Items included in the study refer to inclusion of patients, use of specific tests and risk of bias. Full results of the development of the Molecular Marker Studies Checklist will be presented during the colloquium.
Conclusions:
In this study we developed an evidence-based quality assessment tool for the assessment of studies included in molecular systematic reviews. Our next step is to evaluate the use of the CAMMS tool.
Systematic reviews are a cornerstone in biomedical research and evidence-based medicine. In order to acquire high level systematic reviews, adequate assessment of the methodological quality of included studies is important. In the last decades an increasing number of molecular systematic reviews were published. However, till date no standardized quality assessment checklists are available for molecular studies.
Objectives:
We aim to develop a tool for the quality assessment of molecular studies.
Methods:
Items of previously undertaken reviews were used to set up an initial list of items. A literature search was conduced to complete this list. We organised a panel to discuss which of these items should be included in the quality assessment. After consensus was reached, the items were assessed by ten experts in the field using a web-based survey, this procedure is called a Delphi procedure. The development is partially iterative, resulting in an improved version after each iterative cycle. Members of this expert panel were experienced in molecular markers studies.
Results:
We expect that after three rounds consensus will be reached and that the initial list of 17 items will than be shortened to 14 items in the final version. We have named the tool 'Critical Appraisal of Molecular Marker Studies' (CAMMS). Items included in the study refer to inclusion of patients, use of specific tests and risk of bias. Full results of the development of the Molecular Marker Studies Checklist will be presented during the colloquium.
Conclusions:
In this study we developed an evidence-based quality assessment tool for the assessment of studies included in molecular systematic reviews. Our next step is to evaluate the use of the CAMMS tool.