Warne, Leon N., Schug, Stephan A., Beths, Thierry, Brondani, Juliana T., Carter, Jennifer E., Lascelles, Duncan B.X., Raisis, Anthea L., Robertson, Sheilah A., Steagall, Paulo V.M., Taylor, Polly M., Whittem, Ted, and Bauquier, Sébastien H. (2018) Content validation of a Critical Appraisal Tool for Reviewing Analgesia Studies (CATRAS) involving subjects incapable of self-reporting pain. Pain Reports, 3 (4). e670. pp. 2471-2531.

Preview

PDF (Published Version) - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike. Download (446kB) | Preview

 

489

Abstract

Introduction: This article reports the content validation of a Critical Appraisal Tool designed to Review the quality of Analgesia Studies (CATRAS) involving subjects incapable of self-reporting pain and provide guidance as to the strengths and weakness of findings. The CATRAS quality items encompass 3 domains: level of evidence, methodological soundness, and grading of the pain assessment tool. Objectives: To validate a critical appraisal tool for reviewing analgesia studies involving subjects incapable of self-reporting pain. Methods: Content validation was achieved using Delphi methodology through panel consensus. A panel of 6 experts reviewed the CATRAS in 3 rounds and quantitatively rated the relevance of the instrument and each of its quality items to their respective domains. Results: Content validation was achieved for each item of the CATRAS and the tool as a whole. Item-level content validity index and kappa coefficient were at least greater than 0.83 and 0.81, respectively, for all items except for one item in domain 2 that was later removed. Scale-level content validity index was 97% (excellent content validity). Conclusions: This 67-item critical appraisal tool may enable critical and quantitative assessment of the quality of individual analgesia trials involving subjects incapable of self-reporting pain for use in systematic reviews and meta-analysis studies.

Actions (Repository Staff Only)

Item Control Page