| Study design(s) targeted by the tool | Observational studies (mixed designs)observational-studies |
|---|---|
| Additional details on designs | Observational comparative effectiveness studies |
| Tool area | Health |
| Link to the tool | Get the RELEVANT tool |
Details | |
| Website | |
| Primary publication | Campbell J, Perry R, Papadopoulos N, et al. The REal Life EVidence AssessmeNt Tool (RELEVANT): development of a novel quality assurance asset to rate observational comparative effectiveness research studies. Clin Transl Allergy. 2019;9:21. doi:10.1186/s13601-019-0256-9. |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13601-019-0256-9 |
| Guidance document | Get the RELEVANT guidance |
| Training | None known – please contact us if you are aware of any training that should be listed here. |
| Language | English |
| Translations | None known – please contact us if you are aware of any translations that should be listed here. |
| Record last updated | 30/05/2025 |
Related tools and Publications | |
| Previous versions | None |
| Updated versions | None |
| Related tools | None |
| Evaluations | Roche, N., Campbell, J.D., Krishnan, J.A. et al. Quality standards in respiratory real-life effectiveness research: the REal Life EVidence AssessmeNt Tool (RELEVANT): report from the Respiratory Effectiveness Group—European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Task Force. Clin Transl Allergy 9, 20 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13601-019-0255-x |
| Other publications | Roche, N., Campbell, J.D., Krishnan, J.A. et al. Quality standards in respiratory real-life effectiveness research: the REal Life EVidence AssessmeNt Tool (RELEVANT): report from the Respiratory Effectiveness Group—European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Task Force. Clin Transl Allergy 9, 20 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13601-019-0255-x |
Key Criteria | |
| Focuses on risk of bias, or makes a distinction between items that assess risk of bias and other aspects of study quality | No |
| Offers a method to reach either a domain specific or overall assessment of risk of bias | No |
| Tool development involving a range of stakeholders from different disciplines (e.g. methodologists, statisticians, clinicians) | Yes |
| Avoids recommending use of summary numerical quality scores | Yes |
