Consensus on the definition and assessment of external validity of randomized controlled trials: A Delphi study

被引:1
|
作者
Jung, Andres [1 ,2 ,9 ]
Braun, Tobias [3 ,4 ]
Armijo-Olivo, Susan [5 ,6 ]
Challoumas, Dimitris [7 ]
Luedtke, Kerstin [1 ,8 ]
机构
[1] Univ Lubeck, Inst Hlth Sci, Dept Physiotherapy, Pain & Exercise Res Luebeck PERL, Lubeck, Germany
[2] Friedrich Alexander Univ Erlangen Nurnberg, Dept Sport Sci & Sport, Erlangen, Germany
[3] Univ Appl Sci, Hsch Gesundheit, Dept Appl Hlth Sci, Div Physiotherapy, Bochum, Germany
[4] Univ Appl Sci, HSD Hsch Dopfer, Dept Hlth, Cologne, Germany
[5] Univ Appl Sci, Hsch Osnabruck, Fac Business & Social Sci, Osnabruck, Germany
[6] Univ Alberta, Fac Rehabil Med, Rehabil Res Ctr, Dept Phys Therapy, Edmonton, AB, Canada
[7] Univ Glasgow, Inst Infect Immun & Inflammat, Glasgow, Scotland
[8] Univ Lubeck, Ctr Brain Behav & Metab CBBM, Lubeck, Germany
[9] Univ Lubeck, Inst Hlth Sci, Dept Physiotherapy Pain & Exercise Res Luebeck PER, Ratzeburger Allee 160, D-23562 Lubeck, Germany
关键词
consensus; content validity; Delphi study; external validity; randomized controlled trial; trial quality assessment; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS; MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENTS; HEALTH-CARE; COSMIN RISK; QUALITY; GUIDELINES; APPLICABILITY; INTERVENTIONS; CHECKLIST; TOOL;
D O I
10.1002/jrsm.1688
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
External validity is an important parameter that needs to be considered for decision making in health research, but no widely accepted measurement tool for the assessment of external validity of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) exists. One of the most limiting factors for creating such a tool is probably the substantial heterogeneity and lack of consensus in this field. The objective of this study was to reach consensus on a definition of external validity and on criteria to assess the external validity of RCTs included in systematic reviews. A three-round online Delphi study was conducted. The development of the Delphi survey was based on findings from a previous systematic review. Potential panelists were identified through a comprehensive web search. Consensus was reached when at least 67% of the panelists agreed to a proposal. Eighty-four panelists from different countries and various disciplines participated in at least one round of this study. Consensus was reached on the definition of external validity ("External validity is the extent to which results of trials provide an acceptable basis for generalization to other circumstances such as variations in populations, settings, interventions, outcomes, or other relevant contextual factors"), and on 14 criteria to assess the external validity of RCTs in systematic reviews. The results of this Delphi study provide a consensus-based reference standard for future tool development. Future research should focus on adapting, pilot testing, and validating these criteria to develop measurement tools for the assessment of external validity.
引用
收藏
页码:288 / 302
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] External Validity of Randomized Controlled Trials on Alzheimer's Disease: The Biases of Frailty and Biological Aging
    Canevelli, Marco
    Trebbastoni, Alessandro
    Quarata, Federica
    D'Antonio, Fabrizia
    Cesari, Matteo
    de Lena, Carlo
    Bruno, Giuseppe
    FRONTIERS IN NEUROLOGY, 2017, 8
  • [22] External validity of randomized controlled trials of glycaemic control and vascular disease: how representative are participants?
    Saunders, C.
    Byrne, C. D.
    Guthrie, B.
    Lindsay, R. S.
    McKnight, J. A.
    Philip, S.
    Sattar, N.
    Walker, J. J.
    Wild, S. H.
    DIABETIC MEDICINE, 2013, 30 (03) : 300 - 308
  • [23] Quantification of the External Validity of Randomized Controlled Trials Supporting Clinical Care Guidelines: The Case of Thromboprophylaxis
    Abdallah, Sami Morin-Ben
    Dutilleul, Aurore
    Nadon, Valerie
    Yang, Ji Wei
    Marchand-Senecal, Xavier
    Nguyen, Paul Van
    Lamarre-Cliche, Maxime
    Wistaff, Robert
    Kolan, Christophe
    Laskine, Mikhael
    Durand, Madeleine
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2016, 129 (07): : 740 - 745
  • [24] Randomized Controlled Trials and Challenge Trials: Design and Criterion for Validity
    Sargeant, J. M.
    Kelton, D. F.
    O'Connor, A. M.
    ZOONOSES AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2014, 61 : 18 - 27
  • [25] The External Validity of Randomized Controlled Trials of Hypertension within China: from the Perspective of Sample Representation
    Zhang, Xin
    Wu, Yuxia
    Kang, Deying
    Wang, Jialiang
    Hong, Qi
    Peng, Le
    PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (12):
  • [26] The external validity of controlled clinical trials of psychotherapy for depression and anxiety: A naturalistic study
    Morrison, KH
    Bradley, R
    Westen, D
    PSYCHOLOGY AND PSYCHOTHERAPY-THEORY RESEARCH AND PRACTICE, 2003, 76 : 109 - 132
  • [27] Randomised controlled trials: internal versus external validity
    Sedgwick, Philip
    BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2014, 348
  • [28] Consensus on the definition of colorectal anastomotic leakage: A modified Delphi study
    van Helsdingen, Claire P. M.
    Jongen, Audrey C. H. M.
    de Jonge, Wouter J.
    Bouvy, Nicole D.
    Derikx, Joep P. M.
    WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2020, 26 (23) : 3293 - 3303
  • [29] Consensus on the definition of colorectal anastomotic leakage: A modified Delphi study
    Claire PM van Helsdingen
    Audrey CHM Jongen
    Wouter J de Jonge
    Nicole D Bouvy
    Joep PM Derikx
    World Journal of Gastroenterology, 2020, 26 (23) : 3293 - 3303
  • [30] Objective and Structured Assessment of Lung Ultrasound Competence A Multispecialty Delphi Consensus and Construct Validity Study
    Skaarup, Soren Helbo
    Laursen, Christian B.
    Bjerrum, Anne Sofie
    Hilberg, Ole
    ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN THORACIC SOCIETY, 2017, 14 (04) : 555 - 560