Tool to assess risk of bias in studies estimating the prevalence of mental health disorders (RoB-PrevMH).

Tonia, Thomai; Buitrago-Garcia, Diana; Peter, Natalie Luise; Mesa-Vieira, Cristina; Li, Tianjing; Furukawa, Toshi A; Cipriani, Andrea; Leucht, Stefan; Low, Nicola; Salanti, Georgia (2023). Tool to assess risk of bias in studies estimating the prevalence of mental health disorders (RoB-PrevMH). BMJ mental health, 26(1), e300694. BMJ 10.1136/bmjment-2023-300694

[img]
Preview
Text
e300694.full.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution (CC-BY).

Download (803kB) | Preview

OBJECTIVE

There is no standard tool for assessing risk of bias (RoB) in prevalence studies. For the purposes of a living systematic review during the COVID-19 pandemic, we developed a tool to evaluate RoB in studies measuring the prevalence of mental health disorders (RoB-PrevMH) and tested inter-rater reliability.

METHODS

We decided on items and signalling questions to include in RoB-PrevMH through iterative discussions. We tested the reliability of assessments by different users with two sets of prevalence studies. The first set included a random sample of 50 studies from our living systematic review. The second set included 33 studies from a systematic review of the prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorders, major depression and generalised anxiety disorder. We assessed the inter-rater agreement by calculating the proportion of agreement and Kappa statistic for each item.

RESULTS

RoB-PrevMH consists of three items that address selection bias and information bias. Introductory and signalling questions guide the application of the tool to the review question. The inter-rater agreement for the three items was 83%, 90% and 93%. The weighted kappa scores were 0.63 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.73), 0.71 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.85) and 0.32 (95% CI -0.04 to 0.63), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

RoB-PrevMH is a brief, user-friendly and adaptable tool for assessing RoB in studies on prevalence of mental health disorders. Initial results for inter-rater agreement were fair to substantial. The tool's validity, reliability and applicability should be assessed in future projects.

Item Type:

Journal Article (Original Article)

Division/Institute:

04 Faculty of Medicine > Pre-clinic Human Medicine > Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (ISPM)

Graduate School:

Graduate School for Health Sciences (GHS)

UniBE Contributor:

Tonia, Thomai, Buitrago Garcia, Diana Carolina, Mesa Vieira, Cristina, Low, Nicola, Salanti, Georgia

Subjects:

600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health
300 Social sciences, sociology & anthropology > 360 Social problems & social services

ISSN:

2755-9734

Publisher:

BMJ

Funders:

[4] Swiss National Science Foundation

Language:

English

Submitter:

Pubmed Import

Date Deposited:

30 Oct 2023 10:56

Last Modified:

03 Nov 2023 20:13

Publisher DOI:

10.1136/bmjment-2023-300694

PubMed ID:

37899074

BORIS DOI:

10.48350/188297

URI:

https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/188297

Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback