Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses

1. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000;283(15):2008–12.

   Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

2. Sanderson S, Tatt ID, Higgins JP. Tools for assessing quality and susceptibility to bias in observational studies in epidemiology: a systematic review and annotated bibliography. Int J Epidemiol. 2007;36(3):666–76.

   Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

3. Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D’Amico R, Sowden AJ, Sakarovitch C, Song F, et al. Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. Health Technol Assess 2003;7(27):iii–173.

   Google Scholar 

4. Juni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, Egger M. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA. 1999;282(11):1054–60.

   Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

5. Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality if nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Available from: URL: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.htm [cited 2009 Oct 19].

6. Li W, Ma D, Liu M, Liu H, Feng S, Hao Z, et al. Association between metabolic syndrome and risk of stroke: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2008;25(6):539–47.

   Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

7. Myung SK, Ju W, McDonnell DD, Lee YJ, Kazinets G, Cheng CT, et al. Mobile phone use and risk of tumors: a meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5565–72.

   Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

8. Miettinen OS. Theoretical epidemiology. Principles of occurrence research in medicine. Albany, New York: Delmar Publishers Inc; 1985.

   Google Scholar 

9. Gefeller O, Pfahlberg A, Brenner H, Windeler J. An empirical investigation on matching in published case-control studies. Eur J Epidemiol. 1998;14(4):321–5.

   Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

10. Schüz J, Böhler E, Berg G, Schlehofer B, Hettinger I, Schlaefer K, et al. Cellular phones, cordless phones, and the risks of glioma and meningioma (Interphone Study Group, Germany). Am J Epidemiol. 2006;163(6):512–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

11. Austin MA, Criqui MH, Barrett-Connor E, Holdbrook MJ. The effect of response bias on the odds ratio. Am J Epidemiol. 1981;114(1):137–43.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references