Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Checklists, risk of bias tools, and reporting guidelines for research in orthopedics, sports medicine, and rehabilitation

  • REVIEW
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Data availability

There is no associated data available.

References

  1. Abu-Zidan FM, Abbas AK, Hefny AF (2012) Clinical “case series”: a concept analysis. Afr Health Sci 12:557–562

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Adriani M, Becker R, Milano G, Lachowski K, Prill R (2023) High variation among clinical studies in the assessment of physical function after knee replacement: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-023-07375-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Agha RA, Franchi T, Sohrabi C, Mathew G, Kerwan A (2020) The SCARE 2020 guideline: updating consensus surgical case report (SCARE) guidelines. Int J Surg 84:226–230

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Akobeng AK (2005) Understanding randomised controlled trials. Arch Dis Child 90:840–844

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Ardern CL, Büttner F, Andrade R, Weir A, Ashe MC, Holden S et al (2022) Implementing the 27 PRISMA 2020 Statement items for systematic reviews in the sport and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation and sports science fields: the PERSiST (implementing PRISMA in exercise, rehabilitation, sport medicine and sports science) guidance. Br J Sports Med 56:175–195

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Aromataris E, Fernandez R, Godfrey CM, Holly C, Khalil H, Tungpunkom P (2015) Summarizing systematic reviews: methodological development, conduct and reporting of an umbrella review approach. Int J Evid Based Healthc 13:132–140

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Barrett D, Noble H (2019) What are cohort studies? Evid Based Nurs 22:95–96

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Barton CJ, De Oliveira SD, Morton S, Collins NJ, Rathleff MS, Vicenzino B et al (2021) REPORT-PFP: a consensus from the international patellofemoral research network to improve reporting of quantitative PatelloFemoral pain studies. Br J Sports Med 55:1135–1143

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bilbro NA, Hirst A, Paez A, Vasey B, Pufulete M, Sedrakyan A et al (2021) The IDEAL reporting guidelines: a Delphi consensus statement stage specific recommendations for reporting the evaluation of surgical innovation. Ann Surg 273:82–85

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig L et al (2015) STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies. BMJ 351:h5527

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Bucher C, Lamy D, Debaty G, Pailhé R, Saragaglia D (2022) Validity of the lever sign test for the clinical diagnosis of anterior cruciate ligament tears: assessments in ski resorts. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 108:103254

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Butcher NJ, Monsour A, Mew EJ, Chan AW, Moher D, Mayo-Wilson E et al (2022) Guidelines for reporting outcomes in trial protocols: the SPIRIT-outcomes 2022 extension. JAMA 328:2345–2356

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Campbell AJ, Bagley A, Van Heest A, James MA (2010) Challenges of randomized controlled surgical trials. Orthop Clin North Am 41:145–155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Altman DG, Laupacis A, Gøtzsche PC, Krleža-Jerić K et al (2013) SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med 158:200–207

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Cohen JF, Korevaar DA, Altman DG, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Hooft L et al (2016) STARD 2015 guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies: explanation and elaboration. BMJ Open 6:e012799

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Dahmen J, Kayaalp ME, Ollivier M, Pareek A, Hirschmann MT, Karlsson J et al (2023) Artificial intelligence bot ChatGPT in medical research: the potential game changer as a double-edged sword. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 31:1187–1189

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Doll R, Hill AB (1954) The mortality of doctors in relation to their smoking habits; a preliminary report. Br Med J 1:1451–1455

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Ev E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP (2007) Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. BMJ 335:806–808

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Guiraud K, Silvestre G, Bastin C, Lecouvet FE, Benitez Masip A, Boyadzhiev D et al (2022) Higher sensitivity with the lever sign test for diagnosis of anterior cruciate ligament rupture in the emergency department. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 142:1979–1983

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hess DR (2004) Retrospective studies and chart reviews. Respir Care 49:1171–1174

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ et al (2019) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, 2nd edn. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK

    Book  Google Scholar 

  22. Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Jüni P, Moher D, Oxman AD et al (2011) The Cochrane collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 343:d5928

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Kottner J, Audigé L, Brorson S, Donner A, Gajewski BJ, Hróbjartsson A et al (2011) Guidelines for reporting reliability and agreement studies (GRRAS) were proposed. J Clin Epidemiol 64:96–106

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lelli A, Di Turi RP, Spenciner DB, Dòmini M (2016) The “lever sign”: a new clinical test for the diagnosis of anterior cruciate ligament rupture. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24:2794–2797

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Luo W, Phung D, Tran T, Gupta S, Rana S, Karmakar C et al (2016) Guidelines for developing and reporting machine learning predictive models in biomedical research: a multidisciplinary view. J Med Internet Res 18:e323

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Mabrouk A, Nwachukwu B, Pareek A, Karlsson J, Mouton C, Ollivier M et al (2023) MCID and PASS in knee surgeries. Theoretical aspects and clinical relevance references. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-023-07359-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Maher CG, Sherrington C, Herbert RD, Moseley AM, Elkins M (2003) Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials. Phys Ther 83:713–721

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. McInnes MDF, Moher D, Thombs BD, McGrath TA, Bossuyt PM, Clifford T et al (2018) Preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies: the PRISMA-DTA statement. JAMA 319:388–396

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF (1999) Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Qual Report Meta-analyses Lancet 354:1896–1900

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gøtzsche PC, Devereaux PJ et al (2010) CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 340:c869

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Mokkink LB, Boers M, van der Vleuten CPM, Bouter LM, Alonso J, Patrick DL et al (2020) COSMIN risk of bias tool to assess the quality of studies on reliability or measurement error of outcome measurement instruments: a Delphi study. BMC Med Res Methodol 20:293

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Munn Z, Barker TH, Moola S, Tufanaru C, Stern C, McArthur A et al (2020) Methodological quality of case series studies: an introduction to the JBI critical appraisal tool. JBI Evid Synth 18:2127–2133

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Murray IR, Geeslin AG, Goudie EB, Petrigliano FA, LaPrade RF (2017) Minimum information for studies evaluating biologics in orthopaedics (MIBO): platelet-rich plasma and mesenchymal stem cells. J Bone Jt Surg Am 99:809–819

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Musahl V, Karlsson J, Hirschmann MT, Ayeni OR, Marx RG, Koh JL et al (2019) Basic methods handbook for clinical orthopaedic research, 1st edn. Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany

    Book  Google Scholar 

  35. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD et al (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372:n71

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Page P, Hoogenboom B, Voight M (2017) Improving the reporting of therapeutic exercise interventions in rehabilitation research. Int J Sports Phys Ther 12:297–304

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Prill R, Karlsson J, Ayeni OR, Becker R (2021) Author guidelines for conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 29:2739–2744

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Prill R, Królikowska A, Becker R, Karlsson J (2022) Why there is a need to improve evaluation standards for clinical studies in orthopaedic and sports medicine. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-022-07179-w

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS (1996) Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ 312:71–72

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D (2010) CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 340:c332

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Schulz R, Langen G, Prill R, Cassel M, Weissgerber TL (2022) Reporting and transparent research practices in sports medicine and orthopaedic clinical trials: a meta-research study. BMJ Open 12:e059347

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Schünemann H, Brożek J, Guyatt G, Oxman A (2013) GRADE handbook for grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. www.guidelinedevelopment.org/handbook.

  43. Sedgwick P (2014) What is a non-randomised controlled trial? BMJ 348:g4115

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, Thuku M, Hamel C, Moran J et al (2017) AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ 358:j4008

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Slim K, Nini E, Forestier D, Kwiatkowski F, Panis Y, Chipponi J (2003) Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors): development and validation of a new instrument. ANZ J Surg 73:712–716

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Song JW, Chung KC (2010) Observational studies: cohort and case-control studies. Plast Reconstr Surg 126:2234–2242

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, Savović J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M et al (2016) ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 355:i4919

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Blencowe NS, Boutron I et al (2019) RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 366:l4898

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Tomaszewski KA, Henry BM, Kumar Ramakrishnan P, Roy J, Vikse J, Loukas M et al (2017) Development of the anatomical quality assurance (AQUA) checklist: guidelines for reporting original anatomical studies. Clin Anat 30:14–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Tufanaru C, Munn Z, Aromataris E, Campbell J, Hopp L (2020) Chapter 3: systematic reviews of effectiveness. In: Aromataris EMZ (ed) JBI manual for evidence synthesis, JBI. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-04. Available from https://synthesismanual.jbi.global

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  51. Whiting P, Savović J, Higgins JP, Caldwell DM, Reeves BC, Shea B et al (2016) ROBIS: a new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J Clin Epidemiol 69:225–234

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Reitsma JB et al (2011) QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 155:529–536

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Zhang K, Ma Y, Wu J, Shi Q, Barchi LC, Scarci M et al (2023) The SUPER reporting guideline suggested for reporting of surgical technique. Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr. https://doi.org/10.21037/hbsn-22-50

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

There is no funding source.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University Hospital Brandenburg/Havel, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Brandenburg a.d.H, Germany

    Robert Prill & Roland Becker

  2. Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Brandenburg a.d.H, Germany

    Robert Prill & Roland Becker

  3. Ergonomics and Biomedical Monitoring Laboratory, Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland

    Aleksandra Królikowska

  4. Orthopaedic Biotechnology Laboratory, IRCCS Ospedale Galeazzi Sant’Ambrogio, Milan, Italy

    Laura de Girolamo

  5. Department of Orthopaedics, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Jon Karlsson

Authors
  1. Robert Prill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aleksandra Królikowska
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Laura de Girolamo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Roland Becker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jon Karlsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert Prill.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 56 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Prill, R., Królikowska, A., de Girolamo, L. et al. Checklists, risk of bias tools, and reporting guidelines for research in orthopedics, sports medicine, and rehabilitation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 31, 3029–3033 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-023-07442-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-023-07442-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation