From: Newcastle-Ottawa Scale: comparing reviewers’ to authors’ assessments
Item | Agreement K(95% CI) | Interpretation [8] | 0 point differencec | ±1 point differencec | > ±2 points differencec |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Representativeness of the exposed cohort | 0.03 (−0.10, 0.15) | Slight | 43 (66.2%) | 22 (33.8%) | 0 (0%) |
Selection of the non-exposed cohort | 0.00 (0.00, 0.00) | Slight | 53 (81.5%) | 12 (18.5%) | 0 (0%) |
Ascertainment of exposure | −0.02 (−0.08, 0.04) | Poor | 12 (18.5%) | 53 (81.5%) | 0 (0%) |
Demonstration that outcome of interest was not present at start of study | 0.09 (−0.16, 0.35) | Slight | 47 (72.3%) | 18 (27.7%) | 0 (0%) |
Comparability | 0.00a (−0.11, 0.12) | Slight | 38 (58.5%) | 18 (27.7%) | 9 (13.8%) |
Assessment of outcome | −0.04 (−0.09, 0.00) | Poor | 59 (90.8%) | 6 (9.2%) | 0 (0%) |
Was follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur | −0.06 (−0.22, 0.10) | Poor | 31 (47.7%) | 34 (52.3%) | 0 (0%) |
Adequacy of follow-up of cohorts | 0.15 (−0.19, 0.48) | Slight | 57 (87.7%) | 8 (12.3%) | 0 (0%) |
Total NOS score | −0.004a (−0.11, 0.11) | Poor | 15 (23.1%) | 20 (30.8%) | 30 (46.1%) |
Total categorized NOS score | 0.14b (−0.02, 0.29) | Slight | 44 (67.7%) | 21 (32.3%) | 0 (0%) |