Download PDF
Open Access
CC BY 4.0 · Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2025; 29(02): s00441792083
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1792083
Original Research

Comparison of Two Quality Analysis Checklists Used to Appraise Studies Regarding the Assessment of Auditory Processing Disorder in Older Adults

Authors

  • Vipin Ghosh 

    1   Department of Audiology, JSS Institute of Speech and Hearing, Mysuru, Karnataka, India

  • Asha Yathiraj

    1   Department of Audiology, JSS Institute of Speech and Hearing, Mysuru, Karnataka, India

  • Darshan Devananda 

    2   Department of Speech Language Pathology, JSS Institute of Speech and Hearing, Dharwad, Karnataka, India

Funding The authors declare that they did not receive financial support from agencies in the public, private, or non-profit sectors to conduct the present study.
Further Information
Also available at
  Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Introduction A meta-analysis of published articles is usually done using standard scales and checklists. Several such scales and checklists are reported in the literature. However, there is little information regarding their utility so one can select the most appropriate one, especially in the field of audiology.

Objective The current study aimed to compare a quality analysis carried out using the standard quality assessment criteria (SQAC) for evaluating primary research papers from a variety of fields', and the Modified Downs and Black Checklist (MDBC) for a set of articles in the area of auditory processing deficits (APDs) in older adults.

Methods Two published checklists suitable for the field of audiology (SQAC and MDBC) were compared for a quality analysis of articles on APD in older adults. The two checklists were compared after categorizing their items into five subsections. Two audiologists rated the articles according to both checklists.

Results The interrater reliability was found to be good for both checklists. Significant differences between the checklists were observed for specific subsections. However, there was no significant correlation between the two checklists.

Conclusion It is inferred that the selection of an appropriate quality assessment checklist depends on the objective of the study. If the aim of a quality analysis study is to differentiate articles based on their overall caliber, or primarily based on the subsections, SQAC is recommended. However, if the aim is to distinguish research articles primarily based on the control of variables, or differentiate intervention-based studies, the MDBC is recommended.

Keywords

SQAC - MDBC - meta-analysis - systematic review


Publication History

Received: 03 October 2023

Accepted: 03 September 2024

Article published online:
29 May 2025

© 2025. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

Bibliographical Record
Vipin Ghosh, Asha Yathiraj, Darshan Devananda. Comparison of Two Quality Analysis Checklists Used to Appraise Studies Regarding the Assessment of Auditory Processing Disorder in Older Adults. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2025; 29: s00441792083.
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1792083