NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.
Berkman ND, Lohr KN, Morgan LC, et al. Reliability Testing of the AHRQ EPC Approach to Grading the Strength of Evidence in Comparative Effectiveness Reviews [Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2012 May.
Reliability Testing of the AHRQ EPC Approach to Grading the Strength of Evidence in Comparative Effectiveness Reviews [Internet].
Show detailsTable 8Summary of RCT consistency domain scores, by condition and outcome
| Condition Outcome | Number of Studies (Total N of subjects) | Direction of Difference Between Treatments and Significance | Individual Doman Scores | Reconciled Domain Scores |
|---|---|---|---|---|
MDD Benefits:
| 5 (N=690) | 4 of 5 studies: same direction; all studies: NS | Consistent: 91% Inconsistent: 9% Unknown: 0% | Consistent: 100% Inconsistent: 0% Unknown: 0% |
MDD Benefits:
| 1 (N=108) | 1 study | Consistent: 5% Inconsistent: 0% Unknown: 95% | Consistent: 0% Inconsistent: 0% Unknown: 100% |
MDD Harms:
| 4 (1 open label) (N=904) | All studies: same direction, different measures, some sig | Consistent: 14% Inconsistent: 36% Unknown: 23% | Consistent: 45% Inconsistent: 45% Unknown: 10% |
MDD Harms:
| 1 (N=90) | 1 study | Consistent: 5% Inconsistent: 5% Unknown: 91% | Consistent: 0% Inconsistent: 0% Unknown: 100% |
MDD Harms:
| 5 (N=689) | 4 of 5 studies: same direction; all studies: NS | Consistent: 82% Inconsistent: 14% Unknown: 4% | Consistent: 91% Inconsistent: 9% Unknown: 0% |
RA Benefit:
| 5 (N=1,639) | 4 of 5 studies: same direction; all studies: NS | Consistent: 10% Inconsistent: 86% Unknown: 4% | Consistent: 9% Inconsistent: 91% Unknown: 0% |
RA Benefit:
| 5 (N=1,639) | 3 studies in same direction, 1 other direction, 1 data not reported, 4 studies: NS | Consistent: 48% Inconsistent: 48% Unknown: 4% | Consistent: 45% Inconsistent: 55% Unknown: 0% |
RA Benefit:
| 2 (N=982) | Virtually all measures same direction, all studies: NS | Consistent: 82% Inconsistent: 4% Unknown: 14% | Consistent: 91% Inconsistent: 0% Unknown: 9% |
RA Harms:
| 4 (N=1,215) | Mixed direction, all studies: NS | Consistent: 41% Inconsistent: 36% Unknown: 23% | Consistent: 91% Inconsistent: 9% Unknown: 0% |
RA Harms:
| 4 (N=1,108) | All same direction. 3 of 4 sig | Consistent: 82% Inconsistent: 14% Unknown: 4% | Consistent: 91% Inconsistent: 9% Unknown: 0% |
Abbreviations: ACR = American College of Rheumatology; DAS = Disease Activity Scale; HAM-D = Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression; MADRS = Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale; MDD = major depressive disorder; N = number; NS = not significant; RA = rheumatoid arthritis; RCT = randomized controlled trial; sig = statistically significant.
- Table 8, Summary of RCT consistency domain scores, by condition and outcome - Re...Table 8, Summary of RCT consistency domain scores, by condition and outcome - Reliability Testing of the AHRQ EPC Approach to Grading the Strength of Evidence in Comparative Effectiveness Reviews
Your browsing activity is empty.
Activity recording is turned off.
See more...