Skip to main content

Table 2 Modified Downs and Black critical appraisal checklist applied to observational studies (adapted from Downs and Black [42])

From: The Relationship Between Physical Fitness Qualities and Sport-Specific Technical Skills in Female, Team-Based Ball Players: A Systematic Review

Item #

Question

1

Is the hypothesis/aim/objective of the study clearly described?

2

Are the main outcomes to be measured clearly described in the introduction or methods section?

3

Are the characteristics of the participants included in the study clearly described?

4

Removed.

5

Are the distributions of principal confounders clearly described?

6

Are the main findings of the study clearly described?

7

Does the study provide estimates of the random variability in the data for the main outcome?

8

Removed.

9a

Have the characteristics of patients lost to follow-up been described or did the study have any participant losses?

10

Have actual probability values been reported for the main outcomes, except where the probability value is < 0.001?

11

Were the subjects asked to participate in the study representative of the entire population from which they were recruited?

12

Were those subjects who were prepared to participate representative of the entire population from which they were recruited?

13a

Were the staff, places, and facilities where the participants were treated or where the testing was performed representative of the exams/treatment the majority would receive?

14

Removed.

15

Removed.

16

If any of the results of the study were based on ‘data dredging’ (i.e. ‘data fishing’), was this made clear?

17

In trials and cohort studies, did the analyses adjust for different lengths of follow-up of participants, or in case-control studies, was the time period between the intervention and the outcome the same for cases and controls?

18

Were the statistical tests used to assess the main outcomes appropriate?

19

Removed.

20

Were the main outcome measures used accurate (valid and reliable)?

21

Were the participants in different intervention groups (trials and cohort studies) or were the cases and controls (case-control studies) recruited from the same population?

22a

Were study subjects recruited over the same period of time?

23

Removed.

24

Removed.

25

Was there adequate adjustment for confounding in the analyses from which the main findings were drawn (e.g. the distribution of known confounders that differed between groups was taken into account in the analysis)?

26

Were losses of patients to follow-up taken into account?

27

Did the study have sufficient power to detect a clinically important effect where the probability value for a difference being due to chance was less than 5%?

  1. Scoring criteria [42]: items 1–3, 6, 7, 9–13, 16–18, 20–22, 25–27: yes = 1, unable to determine/no = 0; item 5: yes = 2, partially = 1, no = 0
  2. aIndicates item number was modified