偏倚风险-症状和表现效度(robspv):用于系统评价和荟萃分析的偏倚风险检查表。

IF 3 3区 心理学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Esteban Puente-López, David Pina, Robert D Shura, Reyes Lopez-López, Thomas Merten, Begoña Martínez-Jarreta
{"title":"偏倚风险-症状和表现效度(robspv):用于系统评价和荟萃分析的偏倚风险检查表。","authors":"Esteban Puente-López, David Pina, Robert D Shura, Reyes Lopez-López, Thomas Merten, Begoña Martínez-Jarreta","doi":"10.1080/13854046.2025.2469354","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> The analysis of risk of bias in systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses (MA) is a fundamental task to ensure the correct synthesis of results. To carry out this task, specific tools must be used for each research design of the studies analyzed. The choice of an appropriate tool is currently a challenge for researchers developing SR and MA in the area of symptom and performance validity because the research designs used have been created specifically for this field. Although these designs can be integrated within the classic classifications, they present a number of particular characteristics that are not reflected in any of the current risk of bias analysis tools. The aim of this study is to design a checklist specifically for systematic review/meta-analysis focused on validity tests. <b>Methods:</b> The checklist was developed through objective review of the existing evidence, development of checklist items, and refinement by external feedback and performance analysis. <b>Results:</b> The checklist is composed of four sections: Clinical comparison group selection, sources of bias in either simulation or criterion group designs, and overall assessment of the study. Inter-rater reliability was assessed with a sample of 20 studies, resulting in good to excellent intraclass correlation coefficients for most items. <b>Conclusions:</b> The checklist seeks to fill an important gap in the literature by serving as an assessment tool that improves the reliability of evidence synthesis in symptom and performance validity studies. This instrument facilitates the development of SR and MA that meet international standards, improving methodological rigor and reliability in the forensic setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":55250,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","volume":" ","pages":"1-25"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The risk of bias - symptom and performance validity (RoB-spv): a risk of bias checklist for systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Esteban Puente-López, David Pina, Robert D Shura, Reyes Lopez-López, Thomas Merten, Begoña Martínez-Jarreta\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13854046.2025.2469354\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> The analysis of risk of bias in systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses (MA) is a fundamental task to ensure the correct synthesis of results. To carry out this task, specific tools must be used for each research design of the studies analyzed. The choice of an appropriate tool is currently a challenge for researchers developing SR and MA in the area of symptom and performance validity because the research designs used have been created specifically for this field. Although these designs can be integrated within the classic classifications, they present a number of particular characteristics that are not reflected in any of the current risk of bias analysis tools. The aim of this study is to design a checklist specifically for systematic review/meta-analysis focused on validity tests. <b>Methods:</b> The checklist was developed through objective review of the existing evidence, development of checklist items, and refinement by external feedback and performance analysis. <b>Results:</b> The checklist is composed of four sections: Clinical comparison group selection, sources of bias in either simulation or criterion group designs, and overall assessment of the study. Inter-rater reliability was assessed with a sample of 20 studies, resulting in good to excellent intraclass correlation coefficients for most items. <b>Conclusions:</b> The checklist seeks to fill an important gap in the literature by serving as an assessment tool that improves the reliability of evidence synthesis in symptom and performance validity studies. This instrument facilitates the development of SR and MA that meet international standards, improving methodological rigor and reliability in the forensic setting.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55250,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Neuropsychologist\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-25\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Neuropsychologist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2025.2469354\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2025.2469354","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:系统评价(SR)和荟萃分析(MA)的偏倚风险分析是保证正确综合结果的基础性工作。为了完成这项任务,必须为所分析的研究的每个研究设计使用特定的工具。目前,对于在症状和绩效效度领域开发SR和MA的研究人员来说,选择合适的工具是一个挑战,因为所使用的研究设计是专门为该领域创建的。虽然这些设计可以整合到经典分类中,但它们呈现出许多特定的特征,而这些特征在任何当前的偏倚风险分析工具中都没有反映出来。本研究的目的是设计一个专门用于系统评价/元分析的检查表,重点是效度测试。方法:通过客观回顾现有证据,编制清单项目,并通过外部反馈和绩效分析进行细化,编制清单。结果:检查表由四个部分组成:临床对照组选择,模拟或标准组设计的偏倚来源,以及研究的总体评估。用20个研究的样本评估了等级间的信度,结果大多数项目的等级内相关系数为良好到优异。结论:该检查表旨在填补文献中的一个重要空白,作为一种评估工具,提高症状和表现效度研究中证据合成的可靠性。该仪器促进了符合国际标准的SR和MA的发展,提高了法医环境中方法的严谨性和可靠性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The risk of bias - symptom and performance validity (RoB-spv): a risk of bias checklist for systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective: The analysis of risk of bias in systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses (MA) is a fundamental task to ensure the correct synthesis of results. To carry out this task, specific tools must be used for each research design of the studies analyzed. The choice of an appropriate tool is currently a challenge for researchers developing SR and MA in the area of symptom and performance validity because the research designs used have been created specifically for this field. Although these designs can be integrated within the classic classifications, they present a number of particular characteristics that are not reflected in any of the current risk of bias analysis tools. The aim of this study is to design a checklist specifically for systematic review/meta-analysis focused on validity tests. Methods: The checklist was developed through objective review of the existing evidence, development of checklist items, and refinement by external feedback and performance analysis. Results: The checklist is composed of four sections: Clinical comparison group selection, sources of bias in either simulation or criterion group designs, and overall assessment of the study. Inter-rater reliability was assessed with a sample of 20 studies, resulting in good to excellent intraclass correlation coefficients for most items. Conclusions: The checklist seeks to fill an important gap in the literature by serving as an assessment tool that improves the reliability of evidence synthesis in symptom and performance validity studies. This instrument facilitates the development of SR and MA that meet international standards, improving methodological rigor and reliability in the forensic setting.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Neuropsychologist
Clinical Neuropsychologist 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
12.80%
发文量
61
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Clinical Neuropsychologist (TCN) serves as the premier forum for (1) state-of-the-art clinically-relevant scientific research, (2) in-depth professional discussions of matters germane to evidence-based practice, and (3) clinical case studies in neuropsychology. Of particular interest are papers that can make definitive statements about a given topic (thereby having implications for the standards of clinical practice) and those with the potential to expand today’s clinical frontiers. Research on all age groups, and on both clinical and normal populations, is considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信