Skip to main content

Table 6: Methodological quality of quantitative studies reporting correlations and associations

From: Young carers: growing up with chronic illness in the family - a systematic review 2007-2017

1. Population 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9
 1.1 Is the source population or source area well described? + ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++
 1.2 Is the eligible population or area representative of the source population or area? ++ ++ ++ + ++ ++ + + ++
 1.3 Do the selected participants or areas represent the eligible population or area? + + + + + + ++
2. Method of selection of exposure (or comparison) group
 2.1 Selection of exposure (and comparison) group. How was selection bias minimised? NR NR ++
 2.2 Was the selection of explanatory variables based on a sound theoretical basis? ++ ++ ++ ++ + ++ ++ ++ ++
 2.3 Was the contamination acceptably low? NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA ++
 2.4 How well were likely confounding factors identified and controlled? NR NR +
 2.5 Is the setting applicable to the UK? (for this review: Germany) + + + + + + + + +
3. Outcomes
 3.1 Were the outcome measures and procedures reliable? ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ +
 3.2 Were the outcome measurements complete? ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ +
 3.3 Were all the important outcomes assessed? ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ +
 3.4 Was there a similar follow-up time in exposure and comparison groups? NA NA NA + NA NA NA NA +
3.5 Was follow-up time meaningful? NA NA NA ++ NA NA NA NA +
4. Analysis
 4.1 Was the study sufficiently powered to detect an intervention effect (if one exists)? NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA ++
 4.2 Were multiple explanatory variables considered in the analyses? ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++
 4.3 Were the analytical methods appropriate? ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++
 4.6 Was the precision of association given or calculable? Is association meaningful? ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++
5. Summary
 5.1 Are the study results internally valid (i.e. unbiased)? ++ ++ ++ ++ + ++ ++ ++ ++
 5.2 Are the findings generalisable to the source population (i.e. externally valid)? + ++ + ++ + + + + ++
  1. 4.4 and 4.5 do not exist in original checklist (National Institute for Health and care Excellence, 2012)