Celina Borges Migliavaca1, Cinara Stein2, Verônica Colpani2, Zachary Munn3, Maicon Falavigna4. 1. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Epidemiologia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 2400, CEP 90035-003, Santa Cecília, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil; Hospital Moinhos de Vento, Porto Alegre, Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 910, CEP 90035-001, Floresta, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Electronic address: celinabm7@gmail.com. 2. Hospital Moinhos de Vento, Porto Alegre, Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 910, CEP 90035-001, Floresta, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. 3. Joanna Briggs Institute, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia. 4. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Epidemiologia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 2400, CEP 90035-003, Santa Cecília, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil; Hospital Moinhos de Vento, Porto Alegre, Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 910, CEP 90035-001, Floresta, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study is to identify items and domains applicable for the quality assessment of prevalence studies. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We searched databases and the gray literature to identify tools or guides about the quality assessment of prevalence studies. After study selection, we abstracted questions applicable for prevalence studies and classified into at least one of the following domains: 'population and setting', 'condition measurement', 'statistics', and 'other'. PROSPERO registration:CRD42018088437. RESULTS: We included 30 tools: eight (26.7%) specifically designed to appraise prevalence studies and 22 (73.3%) adaptable for this purpose. We identified 12 unique items in the domain "population and setting", 16 in the domain "condition measurement", and 14 in the domain "statistics". Of those, 25 (59.5%) were identified in the eight specific tools. Regarding the domain "other", we identified 77 unique items, mainly related to manuscript writing and reporting (n = 48, 62.3%); of those, 24 (31.2%) were identified in the eight specific tools and 53 (68.8%) in the additional 22 nonspecific tools. CONCLUSION: We provide a comprehensive set of items classified by domains that can guide the appraisal of prevalence studies, conduction of primary prevalence studies, and update or development of tools to evaluate prevalence studies.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study is to identify items and domains applicable for the quality assessment of prevalence studies. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We searched databases and the gray literature to identify tools or guides about the quality assessment of prevalence studies. After study selection, we abstracted questions applicable for prevalence studies and classified into at least one of the following domains: 'population and setting', 'condition measurement', 'statistics', and 'other'. PROSPERO registration:CRD42018088437. RESULTS: We included 30 tools: eight (26.7%) specifically designed to appraise prevalence studies and 22 (73.3%) adaptable for this purpose. We identified 12 unique items in the domain "population and setting", 16 in the domain "condition measurement", and 14 in the domain "statistics". Of those, 25 (59.5%) were identified in the eight specific tools. Regarding the domain "other", we identified 77 unique items, mainly related to manuscript writing and reporting (n = 48, 62.3%); of those, 24 (31.2%) were identified in the eight specific tools and 53 (68.8%) in the additional 22 nonspecific tools. CONCLUSION: We provide a comprehensive set of items classified by domains that can guide the appraisal of prevalence studies, conduction of primary prevalence studies, and update or development of tools to evaluate prevalence studies.
Authors: Caterina Ledda; Claudio Costantino; Giuseppe Motta; Rosario Cunsolo; Patrizia Stracquadanio; Giuseppe Liberti; Helena C Maltezou; Venerando Rapisarda Journal: Trop Med Infect Dis Date: 2022-01-13