1. Was there manipulation of an independent variable? Yes No
2. Was there a control group? Yes No
3. Were study participants randomly assigned to the intervention and control groups? Yes No
If Yes to questions 1, 2, and 3, this is a randomized controlled trial (RCT) or experimental study. LEVEL I
If Yes to questions 1 and 2 and No to question 3 or Yes to question 1 and No to questions 2 and 3, this is quasi-experimental.
Question
Section I: Quantitative (continued)
1. Does it employ a comprehensive search strategy and rigorous appraisal method?
If this study includes research, nonresearch, and experiential evidence, it is an integrative review (see Appendix F). Yes
Use Appendix F
2. For systematic reviews and systematic reviews with meta-analysis:
Are the studies a combination of RCTs and quasi-experimental, or quasi-experimental only?
Are the studies a combination of RCTs, quasi-experimental, and nonexperimental, or non- experimental only?
A systematic review employs a search strategy and a rigorous appraisal method, but does not generate an effect size.
A meta-analysis, or systematic review with meta-analysis, combines and analyzes results from studies to generate a new statistic: the effect size.
Appraisal of Quantitative Research Studies
Does the researcher identify what is known and not known about the problem and how the study will address any gaps in knowledge? Yes No
Was the purpose of the study clearly presented? Yes No
Was the literature review current (most sources within the past five years or a seminal study)? Yes No
Was sample size sufficient based on study design and rationale? Yes No
Were the characteristics and/or demographics similar in both the control and intervention groups? Yes No
Multiple databases searched and identified Yes No
Inclusion and exclusion criteria stated Yes No
Was there a flow diagram that included the number of studies eliminated at each level of review? Yes No
Were details of included studies presented (design, sample, methods, results, outcomes, strengths, and limitations)? Yes No
Were methods for appraising the strength of evidence (level and quality) described? Yes No
Were conclusions based on results? Yes No
Conclusions flowed logically from the interpretation and systematic review question Yes No
Did the systematic review include a section addressing limitations and how they were addressed? Yes No
Complete the Quality Rating for Quantitative Studies section
Quality Rating for Quantitative Studies
Circle the appropriate quality rating below:
A High quality: Consistent, generalizable results; sufficient sample size for the study design; adequate control; definitive conclusions; consistent recommendations based on comprehensive literature review that includes thorough reference to scientific evidence.
B Good quality: Reasonably consistent results; sufficient sample size for the study design; some control, and fairly definitive conclusions; reasonably consistent recommendations based on fairly comprehensive literature review that includes some reference to scientific evidence.
C Low quality or major flaws: Little evidence with inconsistent results; insufficient sample size for the study design; conclusions cannot be drawn.
