alexa Critical Appraisal of Subgroup Analysis
ISSN: 2471-9919
Evidence based Medicine and Practice

Like us on:

Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700+ peer reviewed, Open Access Journals that operates with the help of 50,000+ Editorial Board Members and esteemed reviewers and 1000+ Scientific associations in Medical, Clinical, Pharmaceutical, Engineering, Technology and Management Fields.
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events with over 600+ Conferences, 1200+ Symposiums and 1200+ Workshops on Medical, Pharma, Engineering, Science, Technology and Business
  • Editorial   
  • Evidence Based Medicine and Practice, Vol 2(1)
  • DOI: 10.4172/2471-9919.1000e115

Critical Appraisal of Subgroup Analysis

Leonardo Roever*
Department of Clinical Research, Federal University of Uberlandia, Uberlândia, Brazil
*Corresponding Author: Leonardo Roever, Department of Clinical Research, Av Pará, 1720 - Bairro Umuarama, Uberlândia-MG-CEP 38400-902, Brazil, Tel: +553488039878, Email: [email protected]

Received Date: Jan 08, 2016 / Accepted Date: Jan 15, 2016 / Published Date: Jan 22, 2016


In the subgroup analysis is performed by separating the data for patient subgroups, such as those in different stages, with different comorbidities and ages. Table 1 shows the checklist needed to make a critical analysis of subgroup analysis [1-8].

Appraisal questions
The hypothesis was before or after the analysis?
The difference between subgroups was one of a small number of hypotheses tested effects?
The difference between the subgroups is suggested by comparison intra studies?
What is the magnitude of the difference between subgroups?
The difference between subgroups is consistent among the analysed studies?
The difference between subgroups is statistically significant? The appropriate statistical test was used?
There is external evidence that supports the hypothesis of difference between subgroups?
There is constant interaction between the results found and previous studies?
Conflicts of interest are declared.
Rate the overall methodological quality of the study, using the following as a guide:
High quality (++): Majority of criteria met. Little or no risk of bias.
Acceptable (+): Most criteria met. Some flaws in the study with an associated risk of bias.
Low quality (-): Either most criteria not met, or significant flaws relating to key aspects of study design.
Reject (0): Poor quality study with significant flaws. Wrong study type. Not relevant to guideline.

Table 1: Critical appraisal of subgroup analysis.

Use this checklist can improve the evaluation of subgroup analysis.


Citation: Roever L, Oliveira BFG (2016) Critical Appraisal of Subgroup Analysis 1: e115. Doi: 10.4172/2471-9919.1000e115

Copyright: © 2016 Roever L. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Select your language of interest to view the total content in your interested language

Post Your Comment Citation
Share This Article
Relevant Topics
Article Usage
  • Total views: 8782
  • [From(publication date): 4-2016 - Dec 16, 2019]
  • Breakdown by view type
  • HTML page views: 8665
  • PDF downloads: 117
Share This Article