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

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.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

31 since deposited on 30 Oct 2023
31 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item