Using quality assessment tools to critically appraise ageing research: a guide for clinicians

Jennifer Kirsty Harrison, James Reid, Terry J Quinn, Susan Deborah Shenkin

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review


Evidence based medicine tells us that we should not accept published research at face value. Even research from established teams published in the highest impact journals can have methodological flaws, biases and limited generalisability. The critical appraisal of research studies can seem daunting, but tools are available to make the process easier for the non-specialist. Understanding the language and process of quality assessment is essential when considering or conducting research, and is also valuable for all clinicians who use published research to inform their clinical practice.

We present a review written specifically for the practising geriatrician. This considers how quality is defined in relation to the methodological conduct and reporting of research. Having established why quality assessment is important, we present and critique tools which are available to standardise quality assessment. We consider five study designs: randomised controlled trials, non-randomised studies, observational studies, systematic reviews and diagnostic test accuracy studies. Quality assessment for each of these study designs is illustrated with an example of published cognitive research. The practical applications of the tools are highlighted, with guidance on their strengths and limitations. We signpost educational resources and offer specific advice for use of these tools.

We hope that all geriatricians become comfortable with critical appraisal of published research and that use of the tools described in this review – along with awareness of their strengths and limitations - become a part of teaching, journal clubs and practice.
Original languageEnglish
JournalAge and Ageing
Early online date7 Dec 2016
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 7 Dec 2016

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Using quality assessment tools to critically appraise ageing research: a guide for clinicians'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this