Skip to Main Content
Adelphi University

Tools for Specific Study Types

Tools for Specific Study Types

Integrative Reviews

  • Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Checklists Appraisal checklists designed for use with Systematic Reviews, Randomized Controlled Trials, Cohort Studies, Case Control Studies, Economic Evaluations, Diagnostic Studies, Qualitative studies and Clinical Prediction Rule.
  • Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) The MMAT is a critical appraisal tool that is designed for the appraisal stage of systematic mixed studies reviews, i.e., reviews that include qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies. It permits to appraise the methodological quality of five categories to studies: qualitative research, randomized controlled trials, non-randomized studies, quantitative descriptive studies, and mixed methods studies. (Hong et al., 2018).

Randomized Controlled Trials

  • CASP Checklists Critical Assessment Skills Programme (CASP) has appraisal checklists designed for use with Systematic Reviews, Randomized Controlled Trials, Cohort Studies, Case Control Studies, Economic Evaluations, Diagnostic Studies, Qualitative studies and Clinical Prediction Rule.
  • JBI Critical appraisal Tools Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) is an independent, international, not-for-profit researching and development organization based at the University of Adelaide, South Australia. Contains a number of critical appraisal tools including Checklist for Randomized Controlled Trials.
  • RoB 2.0  A revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials. Is suitable for individually-randomized, parallel-group, and cluster- randomized trials.

Qualitative Studies

Systematic Reviews

Scoping and Other Review Types

References:

Heise, T. L., Seidler, A., Girbig, M., Freiberg, A., Alayli, A., Fischer, M., Haß, W., & Zeeb, H. (2022). CAT HPPR: A critical appraisal tool to assess the quality of systematic, rapid, and scoping reviews investigating interventions in health promotion and prevention. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 22(1), 334–334. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01821-4

Hong, Q.N., Fàbregues, S., Bartlett, G., Boardman, F.K., Cargo, M., Dagenais, P., Gagnon, M., Griffiths, F.E., Nicolau, B., O’Cathain, A., Rousseau, M.C., Vedel, I., & Pluye, P. (2018). The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. Education for Information, 34(4), 285-291.DOI 10.3233/EFI-180221

Ma, L.L., Wang, Y.Y., Yang, Z.H., Huang, D., Weng, H., & Zeng, X. (2020). Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment tools for primary and secondary medical studies: What are they and which is better? Military Medical Research, 7(1), 7. 

Shea, B. J., Reeves, B. C., Wells, G., Thuku, M., Hamel, C., Moran, J., Moher, D., Tugwell, P., Welch, V., Kristjansson, E., & Henry, D. A. (2017). AMSTAR 2: A critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 358, j4008. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4008