This study investigated performance variability when graduate students critically appraised original studies from a systematic review. Fourteen doctoral students from different academic programs, with no systematic review experience, received training on the Methodological Quality Questionnaire (MQQ) rating scale. Participants were mostly male (71%) and non-native English speakers (79%). Each rater was randomly assigned one original study to independently assess using the MQQ. Their scores were compared to an expert rater. Statistical analysis comprised the following: percentage of agreement (POA), Kappa coefficient, and Kendall’s tau-b correlation. On the completed MQQ rating scale, 43% of the novice raters had a POA of 78% or higher with the expert rater. From this case study, a guide for improving training on methodological quality assessment was developed. Benefits include the following: (a) developing and supporting critical reasoning as well as problem-solving skills and (b) increasing research skills and competencies in the systematic review process.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.