PuSH - Publikationsserver des Helmholtz Zentrums München: Reporting health care decision models: A prospective reliability study of a multidimensional evaluation framework.

Informationen

Hinweise zu Qualitätskriterien von Zeitschriften

Open-Access-Richtlinie der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft 2016

CC Licencences

Metriken für Publikationen

Navigation

Startseite

English

EVA: Veröffentlichen

Neuer EVA Antrag

Recherche

Erweiterte Suche

Durchblättern nach ...

... HMGU-Autoren/Konsortien

... Organisationsstruktur

... Zeitschriften

... Publikationstypen

... Forschungsdaten

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Erscheinungsjahr

Publikationen im Überblick

Statistik

HGF Fortschrittsbericht

OA Publikationen

Eintragen

Neue Publikation eintragen

Neue Publikation holen aus...

...EVA

Fehlende Publikation melden

Highlights

Suche

Hilfe & Kontakt

Ansprechpartner

Hilfe

Datenschutz

Helmholtz Open Science

Bibliometrische Indikatoren

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Müller, D.* ; Gerber-Grote, A.* ; Stollenwerk, B. ; Stock, S.* ; Auweiler, P.* ; Frey, S.* ; Adarkwah, C.C.* ; de Kinderen, R.* ; Hellmich, M.*

Reporting health care decision models: A prospective reliability study of a multidimensional evaluation framework.

Expert Rev. Pharmacoecon. Outcomes Res. 16, 619-627 (2015)

DOI

Open Access Green möglich sobald Postprint bei der ZB eingereicht worden ist.

Abstract
Metriken
Zusatzinfos

© 2015 Taylor & Francis The aim of this study was to evaluate the inter-rater reliability of the Phillips-checklist, a proposed framework for the quality assessment of modeling studies. Six raters evaluated nine modeling studies from three different medical specialties. Intra-class correlation (ICC) and corresponding variance components were estimated from these studies. Raters were asked to comment on their experience with the framework. While overall the mean inter-rater reliability showed no significant rater-effect (ICC = 0.69, p = 0.064), there was – presumably as a result of a lower study variability – a significant rater effect for clopidogrel only (p < 0.001). The framework allowed a more structured methodological assessment but several items remained unclear. Regarding the quality assessment of modeling studies with the proposed framework, the rater variability is similar or even higher than variability because of studies or residual effects. Several scoring items can and should be improved to ease interpretation.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Scopus
Cited By

Altmetric

1.669

0.788