Skip to main content
. 2012 Jun 22;18(4):409–427. doi: 10.1007/s10741-012-9321-3

Table 1.

Checklist of quality criteria used in the quality assessment

Methodological issue Questions addressed Scoring
Theoretical background 1. Is a theoretical background presented, to which the motivation for conducting the study and/or the hypotheses are linked? Y = 3, NR = 2, N = 1
Study participation 2. Is the study population clearly described in terms of age, gender, and important HF characteristics?

Y = 3, NR = 2, N = 1

Y = 3, NR = 1, N = 2

3. Is the percentage of eligible subjects who participated in the study (response rate) adequate?
Sampling 4. Are patients who participated in the study similar to eligible non-participants, in terms of age, gender, and important disease characteristics? Y = 3, NR = 1, N = 2
Study attrition 5. Is the percentage of subjects available for analysis adequate (i.e., >70 %)?

Y = 3, NR = 1, N = 2

Y = 3, NR = 1, N = 2

6. Were reasons for loss to follow-up presented and assessed during the study for possible systematic attrition?
Determinant/correlate(s) measurement 7. Are clear definitions of each determinant and/or correlate provided?

Y = 3, NR = 2, N = 1

Y = 3, NR = 2, N = 1

Y = 3, NR = 1, N = 2

Y = 3, NR = 2, N = 1

8. Are clear operationalizations of each determinant and/or correlate provided?
9. Are the measurement instruments used for the measurement of the determinants and correlates reliable and valid?
10. Were the measurement approach, time and place of measurement of the determinants and/or correlates standardized or conducted in a way that limits systematically different measurement?
Outcome variable(s) measurement 11. Are clear definitions of each outcome variable provided?

Y = 3, NR = 2, N = 1

Y = 3, NR = 2, N = 1

12. Are clear operationalizations of each outcome variable provided?
13. Are the measurement instruments used for the measurement of the outcome variable(s) reliable and valid? Y = 3, NR = 2, N = 1
14. Were the measurement approach, time and place of measurement of the outcome variable(s) standardized or conducted in a way that limits systematically different measurement? Y = 3, NR = 2, N = 1
Statistical analyses 15. Is the percentage of missing values adequate (i.e., <30 %)? Y = 3, NR = 1, N = 2
16. Were multivariable analyses performed? If yes, was it clearly described which variables were included in the (multivariable) model(s)? Y = 3, NR = 1, N = 2
General question 17. Were there any other important flaws in the design or analyses of the study? Y = 3, NR = 2, N = 1

Y yes, N no, NR not reported