Open AccessMethodological quality of case series studies
Author(s) -
Zachary Munn,
Timothy Hugh Barker,
Sandeep Moola,
Cătălin Tufănaru,
Cindy Stern,
Alexa McArthur,
Matthew Stephenson,
Edoardo Aromataris
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
jbi database of systematic reviews and implementation reports
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2202-4433
DOI - 10.11124/jbisrir-d-19-00099
Subject(s) - critical appraisal , systematic review , publication bias , information bias , quality (philosophy) , confounding , evidence based practice , management science , meta analysis , selection bias , computer science , psychology , medline , medicine , alternative medicine , political science , engineering , philosophy , epistemology , pathology , law
Systematic reviews provide a rigorous synthesis of the best available evidence regarding a certain question. Where high-quality evidence is lacking, systematic reviewers may choose to rely on case series studies to provide information in relation to their question. However, to date there has been limited guidance on how to incorporate case series studies within systematic reviews assessing the effectiveness of an intervention, particularly with reference to assessing the methodological quality or risk of bias of these studies.