Quality versus Risk-of-Bias assessment in clinical research
<p dir="ltr">Assessment of internal validity safeguards implemented by researchers has been used to examine the potential reliability of evidence generated within a study. These safeguards protect against systematic error, and such an assessment has traditionally been called a <i&...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | , , |
| Published: |
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | <p dir="ltr">Assessment of internal validity safeguards implemented by researchers has been used to examine the potential reliability of evidence generated within a study. These safeguards protect against systematic error, and such an assessment has traditionally been called a <i>quality assessment</i>. When the results of a quality assessment are translated through some empirical construct to the potential risk of bias, this has been termed a <i>risk of bias assessment</i>. The latter has gained popularity and is commonly used interchangeably with the term <i>quality assessment</i>. This key concept paper clarifies the differences between these assessments and how they may be used and interpreted when assessing clinical evidence for internal validity.</p><h2>Other Information</h2><p dir="ltr">Published in: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology<br>License: <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" target="_blank">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</a><br>See article on publisher's website: <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.09.044" target="_blank">https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.09.044</a></p> |
|---|