The Cochrane Methodology Register (CMR) is a bibliography of publications that report on methods used in the conduct of controlled trials. It includes journal articles, books, and conference proceedings, and the content is sourced from MEDLINE and hand searches. CMR contains studies of methods used in reviews and more general methodological studies that could be relevant to anyone preparing systematic reviews. CMR records contain the title of the article, information on where it was published (bibliographic details), and, in some cases, a summary of the article. They do not contain the full text of the article.
The CMR was produced by the Cochrane UK, until 31st May 2012. There are currently no plans to reinstate the CMR and it is not receiving updates.* If you have any queries, please contact the Cochrane Community Service Team (support@cochrane.org).
The Publishers, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, thanks Update Software for the continued use of their data formats in the Cochrane Methodology Register (CMR).
*Last update in January 2019.
| Title | An evaluation of the Newcastle Ottawa Scale: an assessment tool for evaluating the quality of non-randomized studies [abstract] |
| Authors | Wells G, Brodsky L, O'Connell D, Shea B, Henry D, Mayank S, Tugwell P |
| Source | XI Cochrane Colloquium: Evidence, Health Care and Culture; 2003 Oct 26-31; Barcelona, Spain |
| Date of publication | 2003 |
| Pages | 26 |
| Abstract | The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS), a scale developed for assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies, was evaluated. Face validity of the NOS was examined by comparing each item with the question stem. Criterion validity was assessed by comparing NOS with an established scale (Black and Downs). The quality of 20 studies evaluating the association between breast cancer and hormone replacement therapy (10 cohorts, 10 case controls) was assessed using both scales. Levels of association between the scores were determined through intra-class correlations (ICC). Inter-rater reliability was determined by comparing NOS scores obtained by two raters and ICCs were calculated. Evaluator burden was compared by recording the time required to score a study with each scale. NOS had strong face validity. There was strong agreement between the established scale and NOS for cohorts (ICC=0.88) and moderate agreement for case-controls (ICC=0.62). Inter-rater reliability was high for both cohorts (ICC=0.94) and case-controls (ICC=0.82). The mean evaluation time for NOS was significantly less (p<0.001). The NOS demonstrated good validity and reliability and offered a reduced evaluator burden. This scale will provide meta-analysts with a valuable tool for assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies. OTHER PUBLICATIONS OF THIS RESEARCH: Wells GA, Shea B, O'Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Tugwell P. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses [abstract] 3rd Symposium on Systematic Reviews: Beyond the Basics; 2000 Jul 3-5; Oxford, UK:15. |
| CMR keywords | CMR: Evaluation methodology - non-randomised studies - quality assessment;CMRA9 |
| Reference type | Journal article |