Table 3.
Quality domains and sub-items | Fulfilled (Y/N) |
|
---|---|---|
Primary sub-items | ||
1. Background | 1.1. Clearly stated research question | |
2. Design | 2.1. Population defined | |
2.2. Comparison groups defined and justified | ||
3. Measures | 3.1. (If relevant), exposure (e.g. treatment) is clearly defined | |
3.2. Primary outcomes defined | ||
4. Analysis | 4.1. Potential confounders are addressed | |
4.2. Study groups are compared at baseline | ||
5. Results | 5.1. Results are clearly presented for all primary and secondary endpoints as well as confounders | |
6. Discussion/interpretation | 6.1. Results consistent with known information or if not, an explanation is provided | |
6.2. The clinical relevance of the results is discussed | ||
7. Conflict of interests | 7.1. Potential conflicts of interest, including study funding, are stated | |
Secondary sub-items | ||
1. Background | 1.1. The research is based on a review of the background literature (ideal standard is a systematic review) | |
2. Design | 2.1. Evidence of a priori design, e.g. protocol registration in a dedicated website | |
2.2. Population justified | ||
2.3. The data source (or database), as described, contains adequate exposures (if relevant) and outcome variables to answer the research question | ||
2.4. Setting justified | ||
3. Measures | 3.1 Sample size/Power pre-specified | |
4. Analysis | No secondary item | NA |
5. Results | 5.1. Flow chart explaining all exclusions and individuals screened or selected at each stage of defining the final sample | |
5.2. The authors describe the statistical uncertainty of their findings (e.g. p values, confidence intervals) | ||
5.3. The extent of missing data is reported | ||
6. Discussion/interpretation | 6.1. Possible biases and/or confounding factors described | |
7. Conflict of interests | No secondary item | NA |