Quantity of evidence reflected the number of studies that were included as the evidence base for each ranking. The quantity assessment also took into account the number of participants in relation to the frequency of the outcomes measured (i.e. the statistical of the studies). Small underpowered studies that were otherwise sound may have been included in the evidence base if their findings were generally similar- but at least some of the studies cited as evidence must have been large enough to detect the size and direction of any effect. of evidence reflected the study design. Details of the study designs included in this REA were assessed against a hierarchy of evidence commonly used in Australia: Level I: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) Level II: A RCT Level III-1: A pseudo-RCT (i.e. a trial where a pseudo-random method of allocation is utilised, such as alternate allocation). Level III-2: A comparative study with concurrent controls. This can be any one of the following: Non-randomised experimental trial [this includes controlled before-and-after (pre-test/post-test) studies, as well as adjusted indirect comparisons (i.e. utilise A vs B and B vs C to determine A vs C with statistical adjustment for B)] Cohort study Case-control Interrupted time series with a control group Level III-3: A comparative study without concurrent controls. This can be any one of the following: Historical control study Two or more single arm [case series from two studies. This would include indirect comparisons utilise (i.e. A vs B and B vs C to determine A vs C where there is no statistical adjustment for B)] Interrupted time series without a parallel control group. Level IV: Case series with either post-test or pre-test/post-test outcomes Overall strength
Quantity of evidence reflected the number of studies that were included as the evidence base for each ranking. The quantity assessment also took into account the number of participants in relation to the frequency of the outcomes measured (i.e. the statistical of the studies). Small underpowered studies that were otherwise sound may have been included in the evidence base if their findings were generally similar- but at least some of the studies cited as evidence must have been large enough to detect the size and direction of any effect. of evidence reflected the study design. Details of the study designs included in this REA were assessed against a hierarchy of evidence commonly used in Australia: Level I: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) Level II: A RCT Level III-1: A pseudo-RCT (i.e. a trial where a pseudo-random method of allocation is utilised, such as alternate allocation). Level III-2: A comparative study with concurrent controls. This can be any one of the following: Non-randomised experimental trial [this includes controlled before-and-after (pre-test/post-test) studies, as well as adjusted indirect comparisons (i.e. utilise A vs B and B vs C to determine A vs C with statistical adjustment for B)] Cohort study Case-control Interrupted time series with a control group Level III-3: A comparative study without concurrent controls. This can be any one of the following: Historical control study Two or more single arm [case series from two studies. This would include indirect comparisons utilise (i.e. A vs B and B vs C to determine A vs C where there is no statistical adjustment for B)] Interrupted time series without a parallel control group. Level IV: Case series with either post-test or pre-test/post-test outcomes Overall strength
Question%2012%20Adjustment%20Disorder%20Technical%20Report%202017.docx