The Methodological Quality Assessment of Published Papers based on Family-Centered Empowerment Model: A Scientometric Study
Background: According to the widespread prevalence of different chronic diseases, nurses need to know the choices, necessities, and abilities of patients. The study purpose was to investigate the methodological quality of published papers based on Family-Centered Empowerment Model (FCEM). Methods: T...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | fas |
| Published: |
Vesnu Publications
2020-11-01
|
| Series: | تحقیقات نظام سلامت |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hsr.mui.ac.ir/article-1-1171-en.html |
| Summary: | Background: According to the widespread prevalence of different chronic diseases, nurses need to know the choices, necessities, and abilities of patients. The study purpose was to investigate the methodological quality of published papers based on Family-Centered Empowerment Model (FCEM).
Methods: This study was a systematic review. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline was used to retrieve all national and international studies in the field of FCEM. The final papers were reviewed for different methodological dimensions using three quantitative scales: Jadad, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010, and Newcastle-Ottawa, and qualitative scale of Cochrane risk of bias.
Findings: In the initial search, 644 papers were retrieved; following PRISMA screening guideline, 47 relevant papers were recognized. Jadad scale scores showed that one study received a score of 5 and 33 received a score of less than 3. Consort scale scores indicated that four studies were scored 7 and the same number were scored less than 5. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale scores showed that 13 studies were scored 8, and 4 were scored less than 4. The five dimensions of Cochrane's risk of bias scale are detailed in the paper.
Conclusion: The methodological quality of applied studies based on the FCEM was relatively good, but their reporting style and quality were inadequate. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1735-2363 2322-5564 |