The risk of bias - symptom and performance validity (RoB-spv): a risk of bias checklist for systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 3 3区 心理学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Clinical Neuropsychologist Pub Date : 2025-02-27 DOI:10.1080/13854046.2025.2469354
Esteban Puente-López, David Pina, Robert D Shura, Reyes Lopez-López, Thomas Merten, Begoña Martínez-Jarreta
{"title":"The risk of bias - symptom and performance validity (RoB-spv): a risk of bias checklist for systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Esteban Puente-López, David Pina, Robert D Shura, Reyes Lopez-López, Thomas Merten, Begoña Martínez-Jarreta","doi":"10.1080/13854046.2025.2469354","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> The analysis of risk of bias in systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses (MA) is a fundamental task to ensure the correct synthesis of results. To carry out this task, specific tools must be used for each research design of the studies analyzed. The choice of an appropriate tool is currently a challenge for researchers developing SR and MA in the area of symptom and performance validity because the research designs used have been created specifically for this field. Although these designs can be integrated within the classic classifications, they present a number of particular characteristics that are not reflected in any of the current risk of bias analysis tools. The aim of this study is to design a checklist specifically for systematic review/meta-analysis focused on validity tests. <b>Methods:</b> The checklist was developed through objective review of the existing evidence, development of checklist items, and refinement by external feedback and performance analysis. <b>Results:</b> The checklist is composed of four sections: Clinical comparison group selection, sources of bias in either simulation or criterion group designs, and overall assessment of the study. Inter-rater reliability was assessed with a sample of 20 studies, resulting in good to excellent intraclass correlation coefficients for most items. <b>Conclusions:</b> The checklist seeks to fill an important gap in the literature by serving as an assessment tool that improves the reliability of evidence synthesis in symptom and performance validity studies. This instrument facilitates the development of SR and MA that meet international standards, improving methodological rigor and reliability in the forensic setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":55250,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","volume":" ","pages":"1-25"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2025.2469354","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The analysis of risk of bias in systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses (MA) is a fundamental task to ensure the correct synthesis of results. To carry out this task, specific tools must be used for each research design of the studies analyzed. The choice of an appropriate tool is currently a challenge for researchers developing SR and MA in the area of symptom and performance validity because the research designs used have been created specifically for this field. Although these designs can be integrated within the classic classifications, they present a number of particular characteristics that are not reflected in any of the current risk of bias analysis tools. The aim of this study is to design a checklist specifically for systematic review/meta-analysis focused on validity tests. Methods: The checklist was developed through objective review of the existing evidence, development of checklist items, and refinement by external feedback and performance analysis. Results: The checklist is composed of four sections: Clinical comparison group selection, sources of bias in either simulation or criterion group designs, and overall assessment of the study. Inter-rater reliability was assessed with a sample of 20 studies, resulting in good to excellent intraclass correlation coefficients for most items. Conclusions: The checklist seeks to fill an important gap in the literature by serving as an assessment tool that improves the reliability of evidence synthesis in symptom and performance validity studies. This instrument facilitates the development of SR and MA that meet international standards, improving methodological rigor and reliability in the forensic setting.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Neuropsychologist
Clinical Neuropsychologist 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
12.80%
发文量
61
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Clinical Neuropsychologist (TCN) serves as the premier forum for (1) state-of-the-art clinically-relevant scientific research, (2) in-depth professional discussions of matters germane to evidence-based practice, and (3) clinical case studies in neuropsychology. Of particular interest are papers that can make definitive statements about a given topic (thereby having implications for the standards of clinical practice) and those with the potential to expand today’s clinical frontiers. Research on all age groups, and on both clinical and normal populations, is considered.
期刊最新文献
Adapting the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised with Semantic Cues: Assessing diagnostic utility in a Spanish clinical population. New regression-based norms for the Trail Making Test on Norwegian older adults: Understanding the effect of education. Ability of the D-KEFS Color-Word Interference Test as an embedded measure to identify noncredible neurocognitive performance in personal injury litigants. Demographically-adjusted norms for Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test (RCFT) for Sri Lankan adults. The risk of bias - symptom and performance validity (RoB-spv): a risk of bias checklist for systematic review and meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1