Development of a Quality Checklist Using Delphi Methods for Prescriptive Clinical Prediction Rules: The QUADCPR

Cook, Chad; Brismée, Jean‐Michel; Pietrobon, Ricardo; Sizer, P. S.; Hegedus, Eric J.; Riddle, Daniel L.

doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2009.11.010

Cited by 24 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 64 publications

(107 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies that aimed to investigate predictors of outcome after a specific treatment were further evaluated for quality using a checklist for prescriptive, derivation-based clinical prediction rules (QUADCPR) 22. The QUADCPR was designed and developed using a three-round Delphi process involving physicians, epidemiologists and physical therapists.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can we predict the outcome for people with patellofemoral pain? A systematic review on prognostic factors and treatment effect modifiers

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPatellofemoral pain (PFP) is a multifactorial and often persistent knee condition. One strategy to enhance patient outcomes is using clinically assessable patient characteristics to predict the outcome and match a specific treatment to an individual.AimA systematic review was conducted to determine which baseline patient characteristics were (1) associated with patient outcome (prognosis); or (2) modified patient outcome from a specific treatment (treatment effect modifiers).Methods6 electronic databases were searched (July 2016) for studies evaluating the association between those with PFP, their characteristics and outcome. All studies were appraised using the Epidemiological Appraisal Instrument. Studies that aimed to identify treatment effect modifiers underwent a checklist for methodological quality.ResultsThe 24 included studies evaluated 180 participant characteristics. 12 studies investigated prognosis, and 12 studies investigated potential treatment effect modifiers. Important methodological limitations were identified. Some prognostic studies used a retrospective design. Studies aiming to identify treatment effect modifiers often analysed too many variables for the limiting sample size and typically failed to use a control or comparator treatment group. 16 factors were reported to be associated with a poor outcome, with longer duration of symptoms the most reported (>4 months). Preliminary evidence suggests increased midfoot mobility may predict those who have a successful outcome to foot orthoses.ConclusionsCurrent evidence can identify those with increased risk of a poor outcome, but methodological limitations make it difficult to predict the outcome after one specific treatment compared with another. Adequately designed randomised trials are needed to identify treatment effect modifiers.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can we predict the outcome for people with patellofemoral pain? A systematic review on prognostic factors and treatment effect modifiers

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Third, the ability to use statistical analysis techniques allows for objective and impartial analysis and summarisation of collected data (Hsu and Sandford, 2007). For these reasons, the Delphi method has been commonly used for the development of consensus- based checklists (Moher et al, 1999; Cook et al, 2010; Mokkink et al, 2010). Approval for this study was obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee of The University of Queensland.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies using transcranial magnetic stimulation to study the motor system: An international consensus study

Chipchase

Schabrun

Cohen

et al. 2012

Clinical Neurophysiology

219

161

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the last decade transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has been the subject of more than 20,000 original research articles. Despite this popularity, TMS responses are known to be highly variable and this variability can impact on interpretation of research findings. There are no guidelines regarding the factors that should be reported and/or controlled in TMS studies. This study aimed to develop a checklist to be recommended to evaluate the methodology and reporting of studies that use single or paired pulse TMS to study the motor system. A two round international web-based Delphi study was conducted. Panellists rated the importance of a number of subject, methodological and analytical factors to be reported and/or controlled in studies that use single or paired pulse TMS to study the motor system. Twenty-seven items for single pulse studies and 30 items for paired pulse studies were included in the final checklist. Eight items related to subjects (e.g. age, gender), 21 to methodology (e.g. coil type, stimulus intensity) and two to analysis (e.g. size of the unconditioned motor evoked potential). The checklist is recommended for inclusion when submitting manuscripts for publication to ensure transparency of reporting and could also be used to critically appraise previously published work. It is envisaged that factors could be added and deleted from the checklist on the basis of future research. Use of the TMS methodological checklist should improve the quality of data collection and reporting in TMS studies of the motor system.

show abstract

“…Le Bon was an advocate for the belief that individual opinions are superior to those of the crowd and was also a ruthless critic of his antecedents such as Herbert Spencer [65, 66]. Le Bon as cited in [67] utilised a chemical analogy to portray his standing that individuals collaborating in a crowd are like “certain elements, combined to form a new body possessing properties quite different from those of the bodies that have served to form it.” LeBon described any assembly of people (no matter their true intention) “an organised crowd.” He stated that “how much” an isolated individual “differs” from a crowd of which they are a part can be “easily measured”, yet he does not provide examples of measurements other than to declare that juries return verdict to which each of the individual jurors would disapprove while also deeming that “parliamentary assemblies adopt laws and measures of which each of their members would disapprove in his own person” [68–70]. …”

Section: Origins Of Wisdom Of the Crowd Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complementarity of Clinician Judgment and Evidence Based Models in Medical Decision Making: Antecedents, Prospects, and Challenges

Zhou

Yiranbon

Antwi

2016

BioMed Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Early accounts of the development of modern medicine suggest that the clinical skills, scientific competence, and doctors' judgment were the main impetus for treatment decision, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy assessment, and medical progress. Yet, clinician judgment has its own critics and is sometimes harshly described as notoriously fallacious and an irrational and unfathomable black box with little transparency. With the rise of contemporary medical research, the reputation of clinician judgment has undergone significant reformation in the last century as its fallacious aspects are increasingly emphasized relative to the evidence based options. Within the last decade, however, medical forecasting literature has seen tremendous change and new understanding is emerging on best ways of sharing medical information to complement the evidence based medicine practices. This review revisits and highlights the core debate on clinical judgments and its interrelations with evidence based medicine. It outlines the key empirical results of clinician judgments relative to evidence based models and identifies its key strengths and prospects, the key limitations and conditions for the effective use of clinician judgment, and the extent to which it can be optimized and professionalized for medical use.

show abstract

Development of a Quality Checklist Using Delphi Methods for Prescriptive Clinical Prediction Rules: The QUADCPR

Cited by 24 publications

References 64 publications

Can we predict the outcome for people with patellofemoral pain? A systematic review on prognostic factors and treatment effect modifiers

Can we predict the outcome for people with patellofemoral pain? A systematic review on prognostic factors and treatment effect modifiers

A checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies using transcranial magnetic stimulation to study the motor system: An international consensus study

Complementarity of Clinician Judgment and Evidence Based Models in Medical Decision Making: Antecedents, Prospects, and Challenges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About