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.