Page 100 - Demo

Chapter 298sTable 5. Quality assessment of case-control studies First author Year of publication Journal Clear research question Clear study populationSample size justification includedSubjects recruited from same populationDefinitions, in/exclusion criteria were valid, reliable, and implemented consistentlyClearly defined cases and controlsCases and/or controls randomly selected from those eligibleUse of concurrent controlsexposure/risk occurred prior to the development of the condition that defined a participant as a caseMeasures of exposure clearly defined, valid, reliable, and implemented consistentlyAssessors of exposure were blinded to the case or control statusConfounding variables measured and adjusted statistically or: account for matching during analysisRatingAberg 2000 Neurology + + - - + + na na na na na - FAberg 2001 Neurology + + - + + + na + na na na - GBoot 2020 Movement Disord + + - + + + na na na na na + GButcher 2017 Brain + + - + + + na na na na na + GHunter 1969 Brit j psychiat - + - + - + na cd na na na - PaMadubata 2014 Genet med + + - + + + na + na na na + GMok 2016 Lancet Neurol + + - + + + na na na na na + GRuottinen 1997 J neurol neurosur ps+ + - - + + na na na na na - Fa Considered poor because of a very limited description of aims and methods. However, data regarding parkinsonism in Klinefelter syndrome were clear enough to be used for data-extraction. Abbreviations: yes (+) / no (-) / cannot determine (cd) /not applicable (na) / not reported (nr). G=Good, F=Fair, P=Poor.Source assessment form: https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-assessmenttools.