It is time to develop appropriate tools for assessing minimal clinically important differences, performance bias and quality of evidence in reviews of behavioral interventions

Sean Grant, Eric R. Pedersen, Karen Chan Osilla, Magdalena Kulesza, Elizabeth J. D’Amico

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

We advocate for the field to define minimal clinically important differences that reflect the perspectives and values of various stakeholders in alcohol intervention research. We also need rigorous risk of bias and quality of evidence assessment tools that are appropriately tailored to behavioral interventions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1533-1535
Number of pages3
JournalAddiction
Volume111
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - 2016

Keywords

  • Brief intervention
  • Cochrane
  • Effect size
  • GRADE approach
  • Minimal clinically important difference
  • Motivational interviewing
  • Risk of bias
  • Systematic review

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'It is time to develop appropriate tools for assessing minimal clinically important differences, performance bias and quality of evidence in reviews of behavioral interventions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this