Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
E-pub ahead of print

A new tool to assess Clinical Diversity In Meta-analyses (CDIM) of interventions

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Ecological momentary assessments (EMAs) did not improve responsiveness of patient-reported outcomes on quality of life

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Machine learning algorithms performed no better than regression models for prognostication in traumatic brain injury

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Consideration of confounding was suboptimal in the reporting of observational studies in psychiatry: a meta-epidemiological study

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Cardiac arrhythmias in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019: a retrospective population-based cohort study

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Assessment of assumptions of statistical analysis methods in randomised clinical trials: the what and how

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Blinding in randomised clinical trials of psychological interventions: a retrospective study of published trial reports

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  4. Considerations on the strengths and limitations of using disease-related mortality as an outcome in clinical research

    Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debateResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate Clinical Diversity In Meta-analyses (CDIM), a new tool for assessing clinical diversity between trials in meta-analyses of interventions.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The development of CDIM was based on consensus work informed by empirical literature and expertise. We drafted the CDIM tool, refined it, and validated CDIM for interrater scale reliability and agreement in three groups.

RESULTS: CDIM measures clinical diversity on a scale that includes four domains with 11 items overall: setting (time of conduct/country development status/units type); population (age; sex; patient inclusion criteria/baseline disease severity, comorbidities); interventions (intervention intensity/strength/duration of intervention; timing; control intervention; cointerventions);and outcome (definition of outcome; timing of outcome assessment). The CDIM is completed in two steps: first two authors independently assess clinical diversity in the four domains. Second, after agreeing upon scores of individual items a consensus score is achieved. Interrater scale reliability and agreement ranged from moderate to almost perfect depending on the type of raters.

CONCLUSION: CDIM is the first tool developed for assessing clinical diversity in meta-analyses of interventions. We found CDIM to be a reliable tool for assessing clinical diversity among trials in meta-analysis.

Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume135
Pages (from-to)29-41
Number of pages13
ISSN0895-4356
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 6 Feb 2021

    Research areas

  • Diversity, Evidence, Heterogeneity, Meta-analysis, Quality, Systematic review, Tool

ID: 62238157