Skip to main content

Table 5 Quality Assessment of Included Studies

From: The effects of self-management interventions on depressive symptoms in adults with chronic physical disease(s) experiencing depressive symptomatology: a systematic review and meta-analysis

 

Barley et al., 2014 [78]

Boele et al., 2018 [80]

Espahbodi et al., 2015 [82]

Fischer et al., 2015 [83]

Lamers et al., 2010a b [88. 100]; 2011 [87]

Lee et al., 2014 [88]

Moncrief et al., 2016 [89]

Penckofer et al., 2012 [90]

Rees et al., 2017 [91]

Schröder et al., 2014 [92]

Sharpe et al., 2004 [93]

Sharpe et al., 2014 [94]

Strong et al., 2008 [95]

Thornton et al., 2009 [96]

Walker et al., 2014 [97]

Total

Inclusion criteria specified

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

15

Pre-specified primary and secondary outcomes

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

15

Psychometric properties provided

0

1

1

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

11

Explicit power calculation

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

0

1

11

Target sample size reached

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

0

1

0

1

1

1

0

0

6

Randomization method specified and truly random

1

1

0

1

1

0

0

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

11

Randomization - Allocation concealed

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

0

1

0

0

1

0

0

1

8

Potential co-interventions discussed

1

0

0

0

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

10

Outcome assessors blind

1

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

9

Participants blind to treatment allocation

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

Interventionists blind

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

Adherence > 75%

0

0

0

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

11

Intention-to-treat data analysis

0

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

10

Overall > 80% of sample in primary data analysis

1

0

1*

0

0

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

10

Reason for attrition stated

1

1

1*

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

0

1

1

0

11

Baseline characteristics for both groups reported

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

15

Fidelity monitoring

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

12

Total (/17)

11

10

6

9

12

12

9

12

13

10

12

14

14

11

13

 
  1. Notes: Score of 1 if criterion met; 0 if not met or information unavailable. Pilot studies given automatic 0 for explicit power calculation as aim of pilot studies is not establish efficacy or effectiveness. Pilot studies given 1 for target sample size reached if rationale was provided for sample size and this was met. Thornton et al. (2009) was a sub-group analysis of a larger trial. A post-hoc power calculation was not included; as such, this study was scored as 0 for both power calculation and target sample size reached. Randomization- allocation concealment criterion was met if the person conducting randomization was independent from the research team (e.g., data collection, analysis, development of project aims). For self-directed interventions, participants themselves were considered to the be outcome assessors and interventionists; as such, if participants in self-directed interventions were aware of their group allocation, outcome assessors and interventionist were deemed not to be blind and given a 0 for these criteria. Criterion of overall > 80% of sample in primary data analysis was based on the stated primary data collection time point. If no primary time point was specified, the first data collection point was used. Reasons for attrition stated was based on dropouts after randomization. For self-directed interventions, if adherence criterion was met, fidelity criterion was also considered to be met. Studies were considered to be of high methodological quality if 13–17 criteria were met, moderate quality if 8–12 were met, and low fewer than 8 were met.*Espahbodi et al. (2015): Those who did not complete all intervention sessions were excluded from the study
Back to article page

BMC Psychiatry

ISSN: 1471-244X

Contact us