Crowdsourcing critical appraisal of research evidence (CrowdCARE) was found to be a valid approach to assessing clinical research quality

MJ Pianta; E Makrai; KM Verspoor; TA Cohn; LE Downie

Journal article

Crowdsourcing critical appraisal of research evidence (CrowdCARE) was found to be a valid approach to assessing clinical research quality

MJ Pianta, E Makrai, KM Verspoor, TA Cohn, LE Downie

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology | ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC | Published : 2018

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.07.015

Abstract

Objectives: We developed a free, online tool (CrowdCARE: crowdcare.unimelb.edu.au) to crowdsource research critical appraisal. The aim was to examine the validity of this approach for assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews. Study Design and Setting: In this prospective, cross-sectional study, a sample of systematic reviews (N = 71), of heterogeneous quality, was critically appraised using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool, in CrowdCARE, by five trained novice and two expert raters. After performing independent appraisals, experts resolved any disagreements by consensus (to produce an “expert consensus” rating, as the gold-standar..

View full abstract

University of Melbourne Researchers

Michael Pianta Author

Karin Verspoor Author

Trevor Cohn Author

Laura Downie Author

Related Projects (1)

AN INTEGRATED APPROACH TO IMPROVING THE PRIMARY CLINICAL CARE OF PATIENTS WITH EARLY STAGES OF AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION

Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a leading cause of blindness in Australia. Preventing progression to late AMD is the most valuable..

Grants

Awarded by Macular Disease Foundation Australia

Funding Acknowledgements

This project received funding support from a NHMRC Translating Research Into Practice (TRIP) Fellowship (L.E.D, APP1091833), Macular Disease Foundation Australia (MDFA) grant (L.E.D., 2015) and University of Melbourne Learning and Teaching Initiative grant (M.J.P. and L.E.D., 2016). The sponsors had no role in the experimental design, conduct or reporting of this research. We acknowledge the five novice raters who contributed the appraisals for this article: Yokim Bonggotgetsakul, Lucy Dirito, Kresimir Kristo, Minh-An Pham, and Mina You.