ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
The Methodological Quality Scale (MQS) for intervention programs: validity evidence.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of a psychoeducational intervention on myositis patients' quality of life and well-being: a randomized controlled trial.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2024Trial
- Psycho-emotional intervention with parents of very preterm babies during the first year: A single-arm pilot study.Family process · 2024Article
- Methodological procedure based on quantitizing/liquefying: a case study to assess work climate in an emergency department.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: A wide variety of instruments are used when assessing the methodological quality (MQ) of intervention programs. Nevertheless, studies on their metric quality are often not available. In order to address this shortcoming, the methodological quality scale (MQS) is presented as a simple and useful tool with adequate reliability, validity evidence, and metric properties. Methods: Two coders independently applied the MQS to a set of primary studies. The number of MQ facets was determined in parallel analyses before performing factor analyses. For each facet of validity obtained, mean and standard deviation are presented jointly with reliability and average discrimination. Additionally, the validity facet scores are interpreted based on Shadish, Cook, and Campbell's validity model. Results and discussion: An empirical validation of the three facets of the MQ (external, internal, and construct validity) and the interpretation of the scores were obtained based on a theoretical framework. Unlike other existing scales, MQS is easy to apply and presents adequate metric properties. In addition, MQ profiles can be obtained in different areas of intervention using different methodologies and proves useful for both researchers doing meta-analysis and for evaluators and professionals designing a new intervention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.