Skip to main content

Interobserver reliability for application of tools for assessing quality and susceptibility to bias in observational studies

Date and Location




Monday 23 September 2013 - 10:30 - 12:00


Presenting author and contact person

Presenting author

Valter Silva

Contact person

Bruna Salani Mota
Abstract text
Background:The decisions for medical practices are being encouraged based on scientific evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Usually, such reviews have concentrated exclusively on randomized trials. Indeed, some investigators have the opinion that non-randomized (or observational) studies should be excluded from all reviews because of the greater difficulties in assessing their methodological quality. However, in many areas of health care few randomized controlled trials exist and meta-analyses of observational studies may be important for healthy politics decision, mainly when the feasibility to perform randomized study is extremely difficult. For assessing the quality of evidence from observational studies and try to reduce potential bias numerous tools have been proposed for evaluation of methodological quality Objectives:To evaluate two tools for assessing quality and susceptibility to bias in observational studies Methods: Two authors independently applied questionnaries (Black instrument and New castle Ottawa) in three cohort studies from a systematic review of breast cancer group. Interobserver reproducibility was analyzed using kappa statistics Results:The average of kappa values was 0,3 95%CI (0,12-0,46) for Black and Downs instrument and average of kappa for NOS 0,39 95%CI(0,01 - 0,79) Conclusions: The interobserver reliability was not observed in our study. The tools seem useful to analyze the risk of bias. However a larger sample is needed to show the interobserver reproducibility