Skip to main content

Table 3 Quality-assessment of study methodology*

From: A systematic review of the frequency, duration, type and effect of involuntary treatment for people with anorexia nervosa, and an analysis of patient characteristics

Study(ref.): 1[[18]] 2[[19]] 3[[14]] 4[[22]] 5[[17]] 6[[15]] 7[[23]] 8[[16]] Mean Max.**
Reporting 8 7 4 6 5 8 3 9 6.25 11
External validity 1 1 0 1 1 2 0 2 1.00 3
Internal validity - bias 2 3 1 1 1 2 1 2 1.63 7
Internal validity – selection bias 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 3 2.13 6
Total score 14 14 6 11 8 15 4 16 11.0 27
  1. *Sub-scale scores on the checklist for measuring study quality by Downs & Black.27
  2. Note: Higher scores indicate better methodological quality.
  3. Reporting: degree to which information provided in the study is sufficient to allow an unbiased assessment of the findings (scale 0–11).
  4. External validity: degree to which the findings from the study could be generalised to the population from which the study subjects were derived (scale 0–3).
  5. Internal validity-bias: degree to which the study addressed biases in the measurement of the intervention and the outcome (scale 0–7).
  6. Internal validity - selection bias: degree to which the study addressed bias in the selection of study subjects (scale 0–6).
  7. **The highest possible mean score on the subscale.