This tutorial is to introduce the definition, process, and tools of quality assessment in the systematic literature review.
If you are new to my channel, you can check out the previous events together with this one to get started with the systematic literature review as a research approach.
EP11 Systematic Literature Review Planning: workflow, literature scoping, and review protocol (https://youtu.be/qukb-VytjxQ)
EP12 Develop search strategy: fishing relevant literature for your research (https://youtu.be/9cH5I03jbg0)
EP13 Literature screening: inclusion and exclusion
(https://youtu.be/BCdveqka-E4)
You can browse other previous research sharing in this YouTube list of mine (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...)
Please kindly subscribe if you want to be reminded when I have new videos published on YouTube.
Quality of research requires valid and reliable results that can be trusted. So, the psychometric property is an essential step of successful research alongside the novelty of your research idea.
A systematic review uses systematic and explicit methods to identify, select, critically appraise, and extract and analyze data from relevant research [Higgins & Green 2011].
Quality of research requires valid and reliable results that can be trusted. So, the psychometric property is an essential step of successful research alongside the novelty of your research idea.
A systematic review uses systematic and explicit methods to identify, select, critically appraise, and extract and analyze data from relevant research [Higgins & Green 2011].
ROBINS-I: A tool to appraise the risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions
The ROBINS-I tool can be used to appraise non-randomized studies comparing the health effects of two or more interventions. This includes a number of observational study designs such as cohort studies, quasi-randomized trials, and case-control and cross-sectional studies. Join us for a webinar to learn about the ROBINS-I!
This tool was developed by a team at the University of Bristol.
How can the ROBINS-I help you?
Many types of study designs that evaluate interventions in public health do not use randomization. The ROBINS-I provides a single process that can be used to appraise these different types of evidence. This supports the use of evidence to formulate recommendations and develop public health actions.
The ROBINS-I consists of a seven domain appraisal framework. The tool also offers a number of explanations for ratings, terms, definitions and theory.
This webinar includes an overview of the ROBINS-I by its developers, Jonathan Sterne and Julian Higgins, and a presentation by users Judy Brown and Duvaraga Sivajohanathan.
To see the summary statement of this tool developed by the National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools, click here: http://www.nccmt.ca/resources/search/281
The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools is funded by the Public Health Agency of Canada and affiliated with McMaster University. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
NCCMT is one of six National Collaborating Centres (NCCs) for Public Health. The Centres promote and improve the use of scientific research and other knowledge to strengthen public health practices and policies in Canada.
This is a simple and general presentation about the health research which is prepared to present within staffs of Naulo Ghumti Nepal especially for EIHS staffs, objective if this presentation is to orient staffs about research.
"Hierarchies of Evidence" is an important but problematic concept for medical professionals to understand as it underpins their capacity to be effective practitioners and researchers.
For a School of Information class on medical librarianship, this presentation was created to provide a very basic introduction and overview of the concepts, expectations, and experience of the librarian portion of working in a systematic review team.
Critical Appraisal of systematic review and meta analysis articlesDr. Majdi Al Jasim
Critique of systematic review and meta analysis articles
This presentation is made to educate health care provide rs on how to do critical appraisal of systematic review and meta analysis articles
This workshop is meant to be an introduction to the systematic review process. Further information about systematic reviews was available through a research guide. http://libguides.ucalgary.ca/content.php?pid=593664
ROBINS-I: A tool to appraise the risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions
The ROBINS-I tool can be used to appraise non-randomized studies comparing the health effects of two or more interventions. This includes a number of observational study designs such as cohort studies, quasi-randomized trials, and case-control and cross-sectional studies. Join us for a webinar to learn about the ROBINS-I!
This tool was developed by a team at the University of Bristol.
How can the ROBINS-I help you?
Many types of study designs that evaluate interventions in public health do not use randomization. The ROBINS-I provides a single process that can be used to appraise these different types of evidence. This supports the use of evidence to formulate recommendations and develop public health actions.
The ROBINS-I consists of a seven domain appraisal framework. The tool also offers a number of explanations for ratings, terms, definitions and theory.
This webinar includes an overview of the ROBINS-I by its developers, Jonathan Sterne and Julian Higgins, and a presentation by users Judy Brown and Duvaraga Sivajohanathan.
To see the summary statement of this tool developed by the National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools, click here: http://www.nccmt.ca/resources/search/281
The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools is funded by the Public Health Agency of Canada and affiliated with McMaster University. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
NCCMT is one of six National Collaborating Centres (NCCs) for Public Health. The Centres promote and improve the use of scientific research and other knowledge to strengthen public health practices and policies in Canada.
This is a simple and general presentation about the health research which is prepared to present within staffs of Naulo Ghumti Nepal especially for EIHS staffs, objective if this presentation is to orient staffs about research.
"Hierarchies of Evidence" is an important but problematic concept for medical professionals to understand as it underpins their capacity to be effective practitioners and researchers.
For a School of Information class on medical librarianship, this presentation was created to provide a very basic introduction and overview of the concepts, expectations, and experience of the librarian portion of working in a systematic review team.
Critical Appraisal of systematic review and meta analysis articlesDr. Majdi Al Jasim
Critique of systematic review and meta analysis articles
This presentation is made to educate health care provide rs on how to do critical appraisal of systematic review and meta analysis articles
This workshop is meant to be an introduction to the systematic review process. Further information about systematic reviews was available through a research guide. http://libguides.ucalgary.ca/content.php?pid=593664
The research design refers to the overall strategy that you choose to integrate the different components of the study in a coherent and logical way, thereby, ensuring you will effectively address the research problem; it constitutes the blueprint for the collection, measurement, and analysis of data.
A systematic review (SR) is a rigorous and organized method to synthesize
the evidence from multiple studies on a particular research question or topic.
The purpose of a systematic review is to identify, appraise, and summarize all
available evidence relevant to a specific research question in a transparent
and replicable manner.
It aims to provide a comprehensive overview of academic literature
concerning a particular research question of topic.
This presentation explores the steps nee
This sample answer sheet corresponds with the ninth webinar in the Online Journal Club series, “What are public health interventions’ return on investment?"
The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools is funded by the Public Health Agency of Canada and affiliated with McMaster University. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
NCCMT is one of six National Collaborating Centres (NCCs) for Public Health. The Centres promote and improve the use of scientific research and other knowledge to strengthen public health practices and policies in Canada.
Similar to Quality assessment in systematic literature review (20)
Crafting Hackerspaces with Moodle and Mahara: The Potential of Creation based...Jingjing Lin
Associated keynote talk can be found on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slIITVfOhXg&t=1433s
On February 18, 2022, I delivered a rather interesting and important talk online to a group of 60ish educators, researchers, and practitioners on teaching with Moodle in MoodleMoot Japan 2022. If the following keywords interest you, you should not miss this video: ontology, epistemology, psychology, educational paradigms, learning theories, and pedagogy. This video also for the first time introduces an original untested learning theory called by me "creation-based learning (CBL)". I embrace the learning paradigms of #constructivism and #connectivism. I also am a strong fan of constructionism. I hope CBL will be one step further to promote active learning online. In this video, I also raised the idea of "sustainable learning behaviors" and raised the attention of the public towards sustainable learning behaviors of creating, maintaining, recycling, renewing, and sharing knowledge using networked digital technologies.
What is Mahara?
What can you experience as a user in Mahara?
What is ePortfolio?
What functions does Mahara have?
All answers can be found in this short video.
Re-use: This resource is produced by Jingjing Lin, at Center of IT-based Education, Toyohashi University of Technology. It is licensed
under Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International.
The slides are in Chinese. It is the presentation material of Dr. Jingjing Lin when giving lecture to a group of visiting undergraduates of film production major from Chongqing University.
The Delphi Method and its Contribution to Decision-MakingJingjing Lin
Reading notes of the book Adler, M., & Ziglio, E. (Eds.). (1996). Gazing Into the Oracle: The Delphi Method and Its Application to Social Policy and Public Health. Bristol, PA: Kingsley.
Dr. Jingjing Lin, who finished her Ph.D. lately would like to share her fresh ideas about her research in Massive Open Online Courses and experiences as a previous Ph.D. student.
Define massive open online course: results from systematic review of 84 publi...Jingjing Lin
This presentation introduces a recent study of me. It reviews a total of 84 publications between 2008 and 2016 and provides a new definition of massive open online course.
Backlink's number one influencing factor of successful SEO, This presentation introduces its significant role, types, manifestators, strategies to win backlinks, and how to write a strong blog article with strong backlink impact. Hope you benefit from it.
Academic tourism and hospitality MOOCs: A review (2008-2015)Jingjing Lin
What have been the MOOC practices in hospitality and tourism between 2008 and 2015?
How to describe, develop or evaluate the instructional design in a MOOC?
What are the characteristics of academic MOOCs in hospitality and tourism produced between 2008 and 2015?
Students, digital devices and success - Andreas Schleicher - 27 May 2024..pptxEduSkills OECD
Andreas Schleicher presents at the OECD webinar ‘Digital devices in schools: detrimental distraction or secret to success?’ on 27 May 2024. The presentation was based on findings from PISA 2022 results and the webinar helped launch the PISA in Focus ‘Managing screen time: How to protect and equip students against distraction’ https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/managing-screen-time_7c225af4-en and the OECD Education Policy Perspective ‘Students, digital devices and success’ can be found here - https://oe.cd/il/5yV
This is a presentation by Dada Robert in a Your Skill Boost masterclass organised by the Excellence Foundation for South Sudan (EFSS) on Saturday, the 25th and Sunday, the 26th of May 2024.
He discussed the concept of quality improvement, emphasizing its applicability to various aspects of life, including personal, project, and program improvements. He defined quality as doing the right thing at the right time in the right way to achieve the best possible results and discussed the concept of the "gap" between what we know and what we do, and how this gap represents the areas we need to improve. He explained the scientific approach to quality improvement, which involves systematic performance analysis, testing and learning, and implementing change ideas. He also highlighted the importance of client focus and a team approach to quality improvement.
Ethnobotany and Ethnopharmacology:
Ethnobotany in herbal drug evaluation,
Impact of Ethnobotany in traditional medicine,
New development in herbals,
Bio-prospecting tools for drug discovery,
Role of Ethnopharmacology in drug evaluation,
Reverse Pharmacology.
The Roman Empire A Historical Colossus.pdfkaushalkr1407
The Roman Empire, a vast and enduring power, stands as one of history's most remarkable civilizations, leaving an indelible imprint on the world. It emerged from the Roman Republic, transitioning into an imperial powerhouse under the leadership of Augustus Caesar in 27 BCE. This transformation marked the beginning of an era defined by unprecedented territorial expansion, architectural marvels, and profound cultural influence.
The empire's roots lie in the city of Rome, founded, according to legend, by Romulus in 753 BCE. Over centuries, Rome evolved from a small settlement to a formidable republic, characterized by a complex political system with elected officials and checks on power. However, internal strife, class conflicts, and military ambitions paved the way for the end of the Republic. Julius Caesar’s dictatorship and subsequent assassination in 44 BCE created a power vacuum, leading to a civil war. Octavian, later Augustus, emerged victorious, heralding the Roman Empire’s birth.
Under Augustus, the empire experienced the Pax Romana, a 200-year period of relative peace and stability. Augustus reformed the military, established efficient administrative systems, and initiated grand construction projects. The empire's borders expanded, encompassing territories from Britain to Egypt and from Spain to the Euphrates. Roman legions, renowned for their discipline and engineering prowess, secured and maintained these vast territories, building roads, fortifications, and cities that facilitated control and integration.
The Roman Empire’s society was hierarchical, with a rigid class system. At the top were the patricians, wealthy elites who held significant political power. Below them were the plebeians, free citizens with limited political influence, and the vast numbers of slaves who formed the backbone of the economy. The family unit was central, governed by the paterfamilias, the male head who held absolute authority.
Culturally, the Romans were eclectic, absorbing and adapting elements from the civilizations they encountered, particularly the Greeks. Roman art, literature, and philosophy reflected this synthesis, creating a rich cultural tapestry. Latin, the Roman language, became the lingua franca of the Western world, influencing numerous modern languages.
Roman architecture and engineering achievements were monumental. They perfected the arch, vault, and dome, constructing enduring structures like the Colosseum, Pantheon, and aqueducts. These engineering marvels not only showcased Roman ingenuity but also served practical purposes, from public entertainment to water supply.
Model Attribute Check Company Auto PropertyCeline George
In Odoo, the multi-company feature allows you to manage multiple companies within a single Odoo database instance. Each company can have its own configurations while still sharing common resources such as products, customers, and suppliers.
How to Make a Field invisible in Odoo 17Celine George
It is possible to hide or invisible some fields in odoo. Commonly using “invisible” attribute in the field definition to invisible the fields. This slide will show how to make a field invisible in odoo 17.
Read| The latest issue of The Challenger is here! We are thrilled to announce that our school paper has qualified for the NATIONAL SCHOOLS PRESS CONFERENCE (NSPC) 2024. Thank you for your unwavering support and trust. Dive into the stories that made us stand out!
How to Split Bills in the Odoo 17 POS ModuleCeline George
Bills have a main role in point of sale procedure. It will help to track sales, handling payments and giving receipts to customers. Bill splitting also has an important role in POS. For example, If some friends come together for dinner and if they want to divide the bill then it is possible by POS bill splitting. This slide will show how to split bills in odoo 17 POS.
The Indian economy is classified into different sectors to simplify the analysis and understanding of economic activities. For Class 10, it's essential to grasp the sectors of the Indian economy, understand their characteristics, and recognize their importance. This guide will provide detailed notes on the Sectors of the Indian Economy Class 10, using specific long-tail keywords to enhance comprehension.
For more information, visit-www.vavaclasses.com
Thesis Statement for students diagnonsed withADHD.ppt
Quality assessment in systematic literature review
1. Quality assessment in SLR
Systematic Literature Review Workshop (SLRW)
Dr. Jingjing Lin
Assistant Professor
Centre of IT-based Education
Toyohashi University of Technology
lin.jingjing.qc@tut.jp
2. Don't judge a book by its cover. (English idiom)
Do not take published studies at face value. (Boland, Cherry, and Dickson, 2017, p.109)
3. Which side are you on?
• It is published in
Nature! It must be a
good quality study. I
have no doubt of it.
• It is published in Nature! But
the sample is rather small
than usual, I doubt its
generalizability.
(Boland, Cherry, and Dickson, 2017)
4. Why you
need QA in
your SLR?
Develop a greater understanding of your studies
and others’ results.
Distinguish between good-quality and poor-
quality studies.
More likely to draw meaningful conclusions from
the data.
Offer you opportunity to acquire critical
appraisal skill.
Validated SLR checklist often includes it to
evaluate SLR’s quality.
(Boland, Cherry, and Dickson, 2017)
5. What is quality?
Quality of individual studies Quality of your SLR
The degree to which a study employs measures to
minimize error and bias in its design, conduct, and
analysis. (Khan et al., 2003, p.39)
To check against validated SLR checklist tools
(Boland, Cherry, and Dickson, 2017)
6. “This is a good quality study”.
Translated into:
• “I am confident that this study’s design, conduct and analysis are
robust to provide results that are credible, trustworthy and
generalizable, and are highly likely to be a true representation of the
results of the tested intervention, phenomenon, or exposure.”
(Boland, Cherry, and Dickson, 2017)
7. When to do QA
Before data extraction During data extraction After data extraction
• When you intend to exclude
poor quality studies in your SLR
NA • You will be blind towards the
quality of individual studies
when extracting data, and your
report is likely to be biased.
• Your greater familiarity with
pooled studies can help you
answer QA questions.
(Boland, Cherry, and Dickson, 2017)
8. Main elements of QA
Element/Bias type What is it Significance
Selection bias Is the sample representative of the population? Generalizability, transferability
Allocation bias How participants get assigned to treatment group? Any human that
influences or interferes such allocation?
Types of design influence such allocation strategy. The stronger the design,
the less bias from allocation to treatment.
Performance bias Is anyone aware of the treatment or made blinded?
(participants, intervention providers, study investigators)
Can such awareness or blindness cause bias in the study?
Detection bias Is anyone aware of the treatment or made blinded?
(people who measure the outcome)
Attrition bias Proportion of participants who stopped the treatment either by self
dropout or withdrawal by the study.
Weaken the generalizability, give insight to the compliance rates, treatment
groups inequality due to participant size change
Reporting bias Are all outcomes stated to be measured actually reported despite its being
beneficial/favorable or not to the authors? Are some results measured
post hoc for the sake of enhancing favorable outcomes?
Reasons that lead to the failure of reporting all stated outcomes need to be
provided, the treatment appears more favorable than it really is
Confounders Participants’ characteristics are similar across all treatments?
(gender, age, health status, social status, etc.)
Participants should be equally balanced otherwise there is a risk that results
are biased in favor of one group than the other.
Concurrent or subsequent intervention Was any other treatment received by participants beside the study
intervention?
Participants should be treated in the same way to reduce the risk of other
effects, which weakens the study intervention’s effect.
Analysis Were the data for all participants included in final analysis even whose
withdrew ones?
If there are data missing for a number of participants and these data are not
considered, published results will not properly reflect the results of the
study.
Funding bias Who funded the study? Funders may want your study to favor positive outcomes instead of negative
outcomes.
QA tools ask questions about bias. Bias types are many. Assessment of
risk of bias covers at least six bias as colored in red in the table below
according to EUnetHTA (2015)
(Boland, Cherry, and Dickson, 2017)
9. Selection bias
Is the sample representative of the population?
Duckling image from: https://pixabay.com/illustrations/ptak-brzydkie-kacz%C4%85tko-bajki-2468019/
10. Treatment Group: Ducks are fed with only company A’s
duck food
Control Group: Ducks are fed with usual farm-food
Allocation bias
How participants get assigned to treatment group?
11. Image by Clker-Free-Vector-Images from Pixabay
Image by ChaminaGallery from Pixabay
“I am eating healthy food.
I will run more to get fit!”
“I need to give special
care to this fat duck
because the
investigators said it is
the most important
duck.”
“Need to feed this fat
duck from treatment
group better.”
Performance bias
Is anyone aware of the treatment or made blinded? (participants, intervention providers, study investigators)
The Hawthorne Effect/Observer Effect
12. Image by Clker-Free-Vector-Images from Pixabay
“This fat duck’s performance is indeed better than other ducks!”
Detection bias
Is anyone aware of the treatment or made blinded? (people who measure the outcome)
13. Attrition bias
Proportion of participants who stopped the treatment either by self dropout or withdrawal by the study.
14. Reporting bias
Are all outcomes stated to be measured actually reported despite its being beneficial/favorable or not to the
authors? Are some results measured post hoc for the sake of enhancing favorable outcomes?
Control Group: Ducks are fed with usual
farm-food
16. QA steps in SLR
1. Note the design(s) of your included studies.
2. Identify the type(s) of QA tool(s) to suit your review.
3. Choose the appropriate QA tool(s).
4. Carry out QA using the appropriate tool(s).
5. Tabulate and summarize results of your QA.
6. Think about how your QA results might impact on the conclusions
and recommendations of your SLR.
(Boland, Cherry, and Dickson, 2017)
17. It is the study design that guide your choice of
QA tool, not the review topic area.
(Boland, Cherry, and Dickson, 2017, p.112)
18. Strength Level Design Randomization Control
High Level 1 RCT Yes Yes
Meta-analysis of level 1 studies with homogeneous results No No
Level 2 Prospective cohort study (comparative, therapeutic) No Yes
Meta-analysis of level 1 or level 2 studies with heterogeneous
results
No No
Level 3 Retrospective cohort study No Yes
Case control study No Yes
Meta analysis of level 3 studies No No
Level 4 Case series No No
Low Level 5 Case report No No
Expert opinion No No
Personal observation No No
The strength of the experimental design is therefore largely reliant on 4 factors: Randomization, Control Groups, Sample Size, and Generalizability.
Different study designs: Levels of evidence
https://www.hydroassoc.org/research-101-levels-of-evidence-in-hydrocephalus-clinical-research-studies/
20. Non-randomized studies (NRS)
e.g., Each participant is assigned to a treatment group based on the previous participant’s assignment.
https://images.app.goo.gl/chfsWhrDCLU63Mnn8
21. Cohort study (prospective comparative study or retrospective cohort study)
https://images.app.goo.gl/jwsJcGd4zUeste2QA https://images.app.goo.gl/zyZ9R2WqETHFbGXC8
22. Case-control
A group of participants with a
particular conditions are
matched for age and other
characteristics with a control
group of participants who do
not have the conditions.
https://images.app.goo.gl/qpDvU3mfhchGXx6a8
23. Case series A person or (series of people) who has been given a similar
treatment is followed for a specific time period.
https://images.app.goo.gl/YKr9n7YZ56FN7zwP6
24. Cross-sectional Data are collected from a number of people or other sources
(e.g., databases) at one point in time.
https://images.app.goo.gl/rVqGvD9yGgPuZ5gDA
26. QA steps in SLR
1. Note the design(s) of your included studies.
2. Identify the type(s) of QA tool(s) to suit your review.
3. Choose the appropriate QA tool(s).
4. Carry out QA using the appropriate tool(s).
5. Tabulate and summarize results of your QA.
6. Think about how your QA results might impact on the conclusions
and recommendations of your SLR.
(Boland, Cherry, and Dickson, 2017)
27. QA tools
• ROBINS-I tool or previously known as ACROBAT-NRSI (A Cochrane Risk of Bias
Assessment Tool)
• the Berger/ISPOR questionnaire
• the Cowley checklist
• the Downs-Black checklist
• EPHPP (Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool)
• the GRACE checklist (Good ReseArch for Comparative Effectiveness)
• MINORS (Methodological Index for Non-randomised Studies)
• NOS (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale)
• the Reisch-Tyson checklist
• RoBANS (Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Non-randomised Studies)
• TFCPS (Task Force on Community Preventive Services)
(EUnetHTA, 2015)
28. QA tools Items Year Applicable study designs
ROBINS-I tool or previously known as ACROBAT-NRSI (A Cochrane Risk of Bias
Assessment Tool)
22-29 2014 NRS (incl. cohort studies + case-control studies),
RCT
Berger/ISPOR questionnaire 33
Cowley checklist 13 1995 NRS, RCT, uncontrolled case series
Downs-Black checklist 27 1998 NRS, RCT
EPHPP (Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool)
GRACE checklist (Good ReseArch for Comparative Effectiveness) 11
MINORS (Methodological Index for Non-randomised Studies) 12 NRS, RCT
NOS (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale) 8 NRS
Reisch-Tyson checklist 57 1989 Any study design
RoBANS (Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Non-randomised Studies) 8 2013 NRS (not to non-comparative studies)
TFCPS (Task Force on Community Preventive Services) 26+23 NRS, RCT
Thomas 21 (no date) Any study design
Zaza et al. 22 2000 Any study design
Critical appraisal skills program (CASP) 2013 NRS, RCT, SLR
Centre for reviews and dissemination guidance (health care studies) x 2009 SLR guideline, guides to criteria important in the
assessment of studies
Joanna Briggs Institute (health care studies) x 2014 SLR guideline, , a set of appraisal tools for a range
of study designs
Social care institute for excellence (SCIE) x 2010 SLR guideline, minimum generic criteria for
assessing quality of primary research.
(EUnetHTA, 2015; Boland, Cherry, & Dickson, 2017)
30. QA steps in SLR
1. Note the design(s) of your included studies.
2. Identify the type(s) of QA tool(s) to suit your review.
3. Choose the appropriate QA tool(s).
4. Carry out QA using the appropriate tool(s).
5. Tabulate and summarize results of your QA.
6. Think about how your QA results might impact on the conclusions
and recommendations of your SLR.
(Boland, Cherry, and Dickson, 2017)
33. References
• Boland, A., Cherry, G., & Dickson, R. (Eds.). (2017). Doing a
systematic review: A student's guide. Sage.
• EUnetHTA. (2015). WP: Internal validity of non-randomised
studies (nrs) on interventions, 2015.
• Peterson, J., Welch, V., Losos, M., & Tugwell, P. J. O. O. H. R. I.
(2011). The Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) for assessing the
quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. Ottawa:
Ottawa Hospital Research Institute.