|
Items identified through the factor analysis |
||||||||||||
| Original instrument (item no) |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||
| 1 Protocol |
Sacks |
.58 |
||||||||||
| 2 Literature Search |
Sacks |
.82 |
||||||||||
| 3 List of Trials Analyzed |
Sacks |
.75 |
||||||||||
| 4 Log of Rejected Trials |
Sacks |
.68 |
||||||||||
| 5 Treatment Assignment |
Sacks |
.80 |
||||||||||
| 6 Ranges of Patients |
Sacks |
|||||||||||
| 7 Range of Treatment |
Sacks |
.88 |
||||||||||
| 8 Range of Diagnosis |
Sacks |
.80 |
||||||||||
| 9 CombinabilityCriteria |
Sacks |
.88 |
||||||||||
| 10 Measurement |
Sacks |
.57 |
||||||||||
| 11 Selection Bias |
Sacks |
.85 |
||||||||||
| 12 Data abstraction |
Sacks |
.50 |
||||||||||
| 13 Inter-observer Agreement |
Sacks |
.65 |
||||||||||
| 14 Sources of Support |
Sacks |
.64 |
||||||||||
| 15 Statistical Methods |
Sacks |
.81 |
||||||||||
| 16. Statistical Errors |
Sacks |
|||||||||||
| 17 Confidence Intervals |
Sacks |
.73 |
||||||||||
| 18 Subgroup Analysis |
Sacks |
|||||||||||
| 19 Quality Assessment |
Sacks |
.77 |
||||||||||
| 20 Varying Methods |
Sacks |
.63 |
||||||||||
| 21 Publication Bias 1 |
Sacks |
.77 |
||||||||||
| 22 Caveats |
Sacks |
|||||||||||
| 23 Economic Impact |
Sacks |
.84 |
||||||||||
| 24 Language 1 |
Added to Sacks |
.79 |
||||||||||
| 25 Search Strategy |
OQAQ (1) |
.81 |
||||||||||
| 26 Was the search comprehensive |
OQAQ (2) |
|||||||||||
| 27 Criteria used for deciding which studies to include |
OQAQ (3) |
|||||||||||
| 28 Was bias in the selection avoided |
OQAQ (4) |
.81 |
||||||||||
| 29 Were the criteria used for assessing the validity reported? |
OQAQ (5) |
.75 |
||||||||||
| 30 Was the validity of all studies referred to in the text assessed using appropriate criteria |
OQAQ (6) |
.53 |
.60 |
|||||||||
| 31 Were the methods used to combine the finding of the relevant studies reported |
OQAQ (7) |
|||||||||||
| 32 Were the findings of the relevant studies combined appropriately |
OQAQ (8) |
.78 |
||||||||||
| 33 Were the conclusions made by the author supported by the data |
OQAQ (9) |
.68 |
||||||||||
| 34 Overall Summary |
OQAQ (10) |
|||||||||||
| 35. Publication Bias 2 |
Additional (1) |
.80 |
||||||||||
| 36 Publication Status |
Additional (2) |
.77 |
||||||||||
| 37 Language 2 |
Additional (3) |
.63 |
||||||||||
Shea et al. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2007 7:10 doi:10.1186/1471-2288-7-10 |
||||||||||||