Risk of bias in randomized controlled trials of psychological treatments for bulimia nervosa and binge eating

被引：0
|
作者：
Trevizo, Juliana Pagotto [1 ]
Hay, Phillipa [2 ,3 ]
Swardfager, Walter [4 ,5 ]
Cogo-Moreira, Hugo [1 ]
机构：
[1] Univ Fed Sao Paulo, Dept Psychiat, BR-04039032 Sao Paulo, Brazil
[2] Western Sydney Univ, Sch Med, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[3] Western Sydney Univ, Translatinal Inst Hlth Res, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[4] Univ Toronto, Dept Pharmacol & Toxicol, Toronto, ON, Canada
[5] Sunnybrook Res Inst, Hurvitz Brain Sci Program, Toronto, ON, Canada
来源：
ANNALS OF EPIDEMIOLOGY | 2018年 / 28卷 / 09期
基金：
巴西圣保罗研究基金会;
关键词：
Risk of bias; Randomized clinical trial; Eating disorder; Psychological intervention; Confirmatory factor analysis; DISORDERS;
D O I：
10.1016/j.annepidem.2018.06.006
中图分类号：
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号：
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要：
Purpose: In the context of Cochrane systematic reviews/meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials, risk of bias (RoB) is assessed using categorical indicators (low, unclear, or high RoB). This study sought to evaluate the indicators of the Cochrane RoB tool available for construct validity as applied to randomized clinical trials of psychological treatments for bulimia nervosa and binge eating. Methods: Bayesian confirmatory factor analysis was used to test the construct validity of the measurement model underlying the set of five categorical items, and the reliability of these indicators to measure RoB. Results: In 48 primary randomized clinical trials, the model showed good fit indices and factor loadings higher than 0.4. Conclusions: The results support the construct validity of the Cochrane RoB tool and the reliability of three of five items in this health intervention context. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码：625 / 628
页数：4
相关论文
共 50 条
12345