Assessing the quality of randomized trials:: Reliability of the Jadad scale
Assessing the quality of randomized trials:: Reliability of the Jadad scale
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/s0197-2456(99)00026-4
复制
发表时间：
1999-10-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Laupacis, A
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Clark, HD;Wells, GA;Laupacis, A
Jadad等人开发并验证了一种工具，用于使用疼痛文献中的研究评估临床试验的质量。我们的研究确定了Jadad量表的可靠性以及另一组主要研究中设盲对评价者间一致性的影响。四名评估者独立评估了76项随机试验的盲态和非盲态版本。计算设盲和非设盲版本研究中4名评估者组合的评估者间一致性。采用4 × 2 × 2重复测量设计评价设盲效果。Jadad量表的评定者间一致性较差（kappa 0.37至0.39），但删除第三项（退出的解释）后一致性大幅改善（kappa 0.53至0.59）。设盲对Jadad量表评分无显著影响。更准确地描述如何对退出项目进行评分，并仔细执行一套条款惯例，可能会改善评级者之间的一致性。与Jadad得出的结论相反，我们无法证明盲法对质量恐慌的显著影响。(C)Elsevier Science Inc. 1999.
An instrument was developed and validated by Jadad, et al. to assess the quality of clinical trials using studies from the pain literature. Our study determined the reliability of the Jadad scale and the effect of blinding on interrater agreement in another group of primary studies. Four raters independently assessed blinded and unblinded versions of 76 randomized trials. Interrater agreement was calculated among combinations of four raters for blinded and unblinded versions of the studies. A 4 x 2 x 2 repeated measures design was employed to evaluate the effect of blinding. The interrater agreement for the Jadad scale was poor (kappa 0.37 to 0.39), but agreement improved substantially (kappa 0.53 to 0.59) with removal of the third item (an explanation of withdrawals). Blinding did not significantly affect the Jadad scale scores. A more precise description of how to score the withdrawal item and careful conduct of a practice set of articles might improve interrater agreement. In contrast with the conclusions reached by Jadad, we were unable to demonstrate a significant effect of blinding on the quality scares. (C) Elsevier Science Inc. 1999.