articleResearch Integrity and Peer ReviewMar 26, 2019GOLD OA

SANRA—a scale for the quality assessment of narrative review articles

University of Cologne · German Doctors · +1 more institution

PubMed
Indexed incrossrefdoajpubmed

Abstract

Background

Narrative reviews are the commonest type of articles in the medical literature. However, unlike systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials (RCT) articles, for which formal instruments exist to evaluate quality, there is currently no instrument available to assess the quality of narrative reviews. In response to this gap, we developed SANRA, the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles.

Methods

A team of three experienced journal editors modified or deleted items in an earlier SANRA version based on face validity, item-total correlations, and reliability scores from previous tests. We deleted an item which addressed a manuscript's writing and accessibility due to poor inter-rater reliability. The six items which form the revised scale are rated from 0 (low standard) to 2 (high standard) and cover the following topics: explanation of (1) the importance and (2) the aims of the review, (3) literature search and (4) referencing and presentation of (5) evidence level and (6) relevant endpoint data. For all items, we developed anchor definitions and examples to guide users in filling out the form. The revised scale was tested by the same editors (blinded to each other's ratings) in a group of 30 consecutive non-systematic review manuscripts submitted to a general medical journal.

Citation impact

2,016
total citations
FWCI
65.97
Percentile
100%
References
13
Citations per year

Authors

3

Topics & keywords

Keywords
  • Narrative
  • Scale (ratio)
  • Quality assessment
  • Psychology
  • Geography
  • Art
  • Engineering
  • Reliability engineering
UN Sustainable Development Goals
  • Quality Education
No related works found for this paper.