Table 2 Scores on the methodological quality assessment. Quality was rated as poor (0–4 out of 14 questions), fair (5–10 out of 14 questions), or good (11–14 out of 14 questions); NA: not applicable, NR: not reported, CD: can’t determine
From: Patients’ expectations surrounding revision total hip arthroplasty: a literature review
Reference | Eisler et al | Haddad et al | Barrack et al | Hellman et al | Zhang et al |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Journal | J. Arthro | J. Arthro | CORR | Iowa Orth. J | J. Orth |
Year | 2002 | 2001 | 2006 | 1996 | 2023 |
Was the research question or objective in this paper clearly stated? | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ |
Was the study population clearly specified and defined? | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ |
Was the participation rate of eligible persons at least 50%? | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ |
Were all the subjects selected or recruited from the same or similar populations? | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ |
Was a sample size justification, power description, or variance and effect estimates provided? | X | X | X | √ | √ |
For the analyses in this paper, were the exposure(s) of interest measured prior to the outcome(s) being measured? | √ | √ | √ | X | X |
Was the time frame sufficient so that one could reasonably expect to see an association between exposure and outcome if it existed? | √ | √ | CD | √ | √ |
For exposures that can vary in amount or level, did the study examine different levels of the exposure as related to the outcome? | X | X | X | X | X |
Were the exposure measures (independent variables) clearly defined, valid, reliable, and implemented consistently across all study participants? | √ | √ | √ | X | √ |
Was the exposure(s) assessed more than once over time? | X | X | X | X | √ |
Were the outcome measures (dependent variables) clearly defined, valid, reliable, and implemented consistently across all study participants? | √ | √ | CD | √ | √ |
Were the outcome assessors blinded to the exposure status of participants? | X | X | X | X | X |
Was loss to follow-up after baseline 20% or less? | √ | √ | √ | √ | X |
Were key potential confounding variables measured and adjusted statistically for their impact on the relationship between exposure(s) and outcome(s)? | X | √ | X | √ | √ |
Summary Quality | Fair 9 | Fair 10 | Fair 7 | Fair 9 | Fair 10 |