Validity of Qualis database as a predictor of evidence hierarchy and risk of bias in randomized controlled trials: a case study in dentistry
| Autor: | Carlos Alfredo Loureiro, Humberto Saconato, Álvaro Nagib Atallah, Christiane Alves Ferreira |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2011 |
| Předmět: |
Research design
Blinding Time Factors Databases Factual computer.software_genre Scientific evidence law.invention Validity Databases Randomized controlled trial Bias law Statistics Humans Bibliographic Reliability (statistics) Statistical hypothesis testing Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic lcsh:R5-920 Evidence-Based Medicine Database General Medicine Evidence-based medicine Empirical assessment Basic Research Research Design Dentistry Journal Impact Factor Psychology Epidemiologic Methods lcsh:Medicine (General) computer Publication Bias Kappa |
| Zdroj: | Clinics; v. 66 n. 2 (2011); 337-342 Clinics; Vol. 66 Núm. 2 (2011); 337-342 Clinics; Vol. 66 No. 2 (2011); 337-342 Clinics Universidade de São Paulo (USP) instacron:USP Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) instacron:UNIFESP Clinics, Vol 66, Iss 2, Pp 337-342 (2011) Clinics, Volume: 66, Issue: 2, Pages: 337-342, Published: 2011 |
| ISSN: | 1980-5322 1807-5932 |
| Popis: | OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity of the Qualis database in identifying the levels of scientific evidence and the quality of randomized controlled trials indexed in the Lilacs database. METHODS: We selected 40 open-access journals and performed a page-by-page hand search, to identify published articles according to the type of study during a period of six years. Classification of studies was performed by independent reviewers assessed for their reliability. Randomized controlled trials were identified for separate evaluation of risk of bias using four dimensions: generation of allocation sequence, allocation concealment, blinding, and incomplete outcome data. The Qualis classification was considered to be the outcome variable. The statistical tests used included Kappa, Spearman's correlation, Kendall-tau and ordinal regressions. RESULTS: Studies with low levels of scientific evidence received similar Qualis classifications when compared to studies with high levels of evidence. In addition, randomized controlled trials with a high risk of bias for the generation of allocation sequences and allocation concealment were more likely to be published in journals with higher Qualis levels. DISCUSSION: The hierarchy level of the scientific evidence as classified by type of research design, as well as by the validity of studies according to the bias control level, was not correlated or associated with Qualis stratification. CONCLUSION: Qualis classifications for journals are not an approximate or indirect predictor of the validity of randomized controlled trials published in these journals and are therefore not a legitimate or appropriate indicator of the validity of randomized controlled trials. Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) UNIFESP, EPM SciELO |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|