PRISMA 2020Revista espanola de cardiologia (English ed.) 2021
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
Replaced PRISMA 2009 with an expanded 27-item checklist, an abstract checklist and revised flow diagrams for both new and updated reviews, reflecting advances in how studies are identified, selected, appraised and synthesised.
GuidelineManagementResearch, statistics & guidelines
Oxford score MCIDJournal of clinical epidemiology 2015
Meaningful changes for the Oxford hip and knee scores after joint replacement surgery
Group-level minimal important change was roughly 11 points for the OHS and 9 for the OKS (about 8 and 7 points for individual patients), whereas the between-group minimal important difference for trials was about 5 points for both scores.
Cohort studyPrognosisResearch, statistics & guidelines
Use of the Oxford hip and knee scoresThe Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume 2007
The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores
Recommended a simplified scoring system in which higher scores indicate better outcome, and gave guidance on handling missing items and interpreting scores.
OtherPrognosisResearch, statistics & guidelines
JBJS levels of evidenceThe Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume 2003
Introducing levels of evidence to the journal
Introduced a five-level hierarchy, from high-quality RCTs (level I) to expert opinion (level V), applied separately to therapeutic, prognostic, diagnostic and economic studies.
OtherManagementResearch, statistics & guidelines
Oxford Knee ScoreThe Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume 1998
Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement
The questionnaire showed good internal consistency, reproducibility and validity, and was sensitive to change after knee replacement.
Cohort studyPrognosisResearch, statistics & guidelines
Oxford Hip ScoreThe Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume 1996
Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement
The 12-item questionnaire was reliable, correlated with established measures and was responsive to change after surgery, supporting its use as a joint-specific patient-reported outcome.
Cohort studyPrognosisResearch, statistics & guidelines
MCID (Jaeschke)Controlled clinical trials 1989
Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference
Defined the MCID as the smallest difference in score that patients perceive as beneficial and that would mandate a change in management, and showed it could be estimated using global ratings of change.
OtherPrognosisResearch, statistics & guidelines
Bland-AltmanLancet (London, England) 1986
Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement
Showed that correlation coefficients are misleading for judging agreement and proposed a simple graphical approach: plot differences against means and report the mean difference (bias) and limits of agreement derived from the spread of the differences.
OtherDiagnosisResearch, statistics & guidelines