4.6 Article

Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials

期刊

PHYSICAL THERAPY
卷 83, 期 8, 页码 713-721

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/ptj/83.8.713

关键词

evidence-based medicine; meta-anadysis; physical therapy; randomized controlled trials

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Purpose. Assessment of the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is common practice in systematic reviews. However; the reliability of data obtained with most quality assessment scales has not been established. This report describes 2 studies designed to investigate the reliability of data obtained with the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale developed to rate the quality of RCTs evaluating physical therapist interventions. Method. In the first study, 11 raters independently rated 25 RCTs randomly selected from the PEDro database. In the second study, 2 raters rated 120 RCTs randomly selected from the PEDro database, and disagreements were resolved by a third rater; this generated a set of individual rater and consensus ratings. The process was repeated by independent raters to create a second set of individual and consensus ratings. Reliability of ratings of PEDro scale items was calculated using multi-rater kappas, and reliability of the total (summed) score was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC [ 1, 1]). Results. The kappa value for each of the I I items ranged from .36 to .80 for individual assessors and from .50 to .79 for consensus ratings generated by groups of 2 or 3 raters. The ICC for the total score was .56 (95% confidence interval = .47-.65) for ratings by individuals, and the ICC for consensus ratings was .68 (95% confidence interval = .57-.76). Discussion and Conclusion. The reliability of ratings of PEDro scale items varied from fair to substantial, and the reliability of the total PEDro score was fair to good..

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据