Development of the anatomical quality assessment (AQUA) tool for the quality assessment of anatomical studies included in meta-analyses and systematic reviews - PubMed (original) (raw)
doi: 10.1002/ca.22799. Epub 2016 Nov 18.
Affiliations
- PMID: 27718281
- DOI: 10.1002/ca.22799
Development of the anatomical quality assessment (AQUA) tool for the quality assessment of anatomical studies included in meta-analyses and systematic reviews
Brandon Michael Henry et al. Clin Anat. 2017 Jan.
Abstract
Critical appraisal of anatomical studies is essential before the evidence from them undergoes meta-epidemiological synthesis. However, no instrument for appraising anatomical studies with inherent applicability to different study designs is available. We aim to develop a generic yet comprehensive tool for assessing the quality of anatomical studies using a formal consensus method. The study steering committee formulated an initial conceptual design and generated items for a preliminary tool on the basis of a literature review and expert opinion. A Delphi procedure was then adopted to assess the validity of the preliminary tool. Feedback from the Delphi panelists was used to improve it. The Delphi procedure involved 12 experts in anatomical research. It comprised two rounds, after which unanimous consensus was reached about the items to be included. The preliminary tool consisted of 20 items, which were phrased as signaling questions and organized into five domains: 1. Aim and subject characteristics, 2. Study design, 3. Characterization of methods, 4. Descriptive anatomy, and 5. Results reporting. Each domain was set to end with a risk of bias question. Following round 1, some of the items underwent major revision, although agreement was reached regarding inclusion of all the domains and signaling questions in the preliminary tool. The tool was revised only for minor language inaccuracies after round 2. The AQUA Tool was designed to assess the quality and reliability of anatomical studies. It is currently undergoing a validation process. Clin. Anat. 30:6-13, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Keywords: anatomy; bias; quality assessment; tool; validity.
© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Similar articles
- Development of the Anatomical Quality Assurance (AQUA) checklist: Guidelines for reporting original anatomical studies.
Tomaszewski KA, Henry BM, Kumar Ramakrishnan P, Roy J, Vikse J, Loukas M, Tubbs RS, Walocha JA. Tomaszewski KA, et al. Clin Anat. 2017 Jan;30(1):14-20. doi: 10.1002/ca.22800. Epub 2016 Nov 25. Clin Anat. 2017. PMID: 27801507 - Development of a quality-assessment tool for experimental bruxism studies: reliability and validity.
Dawson A, Raphael KG, Glaros A, Axelsson S, Arima T, Ernberg M, Farella M, Lobbezoo F, Manfredini D, Michelotti A, Svensson P, List T. Dawson A, et al. J Orofac Pain. 2013 Spring;27(2):111-22. doi: 10.11607/jop.1065. J Orofac Pain. 2013. PMID: 23630683 - Development of quality assessment tool for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of real-world studies: a Delphi consensus survey.
Gebrye T, Mbada C, Hakimi Z, Fatoye F. Gebrye T, et al. Rheumatol Int. 2024 Jul;44(7):1275-1281. doi: 10.1007/s00296-024-05595-4. Epub 2024 Apr 29. Rheumatol Int. 2024. PMID: 38683352 Free PMC article. - Criteria list for assessment of methodological quality of economic evaluations: Consensus on Health Economic Criteria.
Evers S, Goossens M, de Vet H, van Tulder M, Ament A. Evers S, et al. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005 Spring;21(2):240-5. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005. PMID: 15921065 Review. - Improving the content validity of the mixed methods appraisal tool: a modified e-Delphi study.
Hong QN, Pluye P, Fàbregues S, Bartlett G, Boardman F, Cargo M, Dagenais P, Gagnon MP, Griffiths F, Nicolau B, O'Cathain A, Rousseau MC, Vedel I. Hong QN, et al. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Jul;111:49-59.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.03.008. Epub 2019 Mar 22. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019. PMID: 30905698 Review.
Cited by
- Releasing incisions of the buccal periosteum adjacent to the lower molar teeth can injure the facial artery: an anatomical study.
Iwanaga J, Shiromoto K, Tubbs RS. Iwanaga J, et al. Surg Radiol Anat. 2020 Jan;42(1):31-34. doi: 10.1007/s00276-019-02319-3. Epub 2019 Sep 19. Surg Radiol Anat. 2020. PMID: 31538246 - The prevalence and distribution of the variants of Gantzer's muscle: a meta-analysis of cadaveric studies.
Asghar A, Jha RK, Patra A, Chaudhary B, Singh B. Asghar A, et al. Anat Cell Biol. 2022 Mar 31;55(1):3-13. doi: 10.5115/acb.21.141. Anat Cell Biol. 2022. PMID: 34785621 Free PMC article. Review. - Prevalence and Morphology of Ossified Caroticoclinoid Ligament: An Updated Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.
Triantafyllou G, Paschopoulos I, Luzzi S, Tsakotos G, Papadopoulos-Manolarakis P, Galzio R, Piagkou M. Triantafyllou G, et al. Diagnostics (Basel). 2025 Feb 11;15(4):440. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics15040440. Diagnostics (Basel). 2025. PMID: 40002591 Free PMC article. Review. - Clinical aspects and epidemiology of os peroneum: a meta-analysis.
Preinl M, Osiowski A, Osiowski M, Baran K, Stolarz K, Jasiewicz B, Taterra D. Preinl M, et al. Anat Sci Int. 2025 Apr 27. doi: 10.1007/s12565-025-00838-1. Online ahead of print. Anat Sci Int. 2025. PMID: 40289243 - Morphometric Assessment of Occipital Condyles and Foramen Magnum Reveals Enhanced Sexual Dimorphism Detection via 3D Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Utilizing Classification and Regression Trees.
Tsiouris C, Triantafyllou G, Karangeli N, Botis GG, Papadopoulos-Manolarakis P, Kalamatianos T, Tsakotos G, Piagkou M. Tsiouris C, et al. Diagnostics (Basel). 2025 May 28;15(11):1359. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics15111359. Diagnostics (Basel). 2025. PMID: 40506930 Free PMC article. Review.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical