Cadaveric biomechanical laboratory research can be quantitatively scored for quality with the biomechanics objective basic science quality assessment tool: the BOBQAT score

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Hohmann, Erik
dc.contributor.author Paschos, Nikolaos
dc.contributor.author Keough, Natalie
dc.contributor.author Erbulut, Deniz
dc.contributor.author Oberholster, Abraham Johannes (Abrie)
dc.contributor.author Glatt, Vaida
dc.contributor.author Molepo, Maketo
dc.contributor.author Tetsworth, Kevin
dc.date.accessioned 2024-08-26T12:02:26Z
dc.date.issued 2024
dc.description.abstract PURPOSE : To develop a quality appraisal tool for the assessment of cadaveric biomechanical laboratory and other basic science biomechanical studies. METHODS : For item identification and development, a systematic review of the literature was performed. The content validity index (CVI) was used either to include or exclude items. The content validity ratio (CVR) was used to determine content validity. Weighting was performed by each panel member; the final weight was either up- or downgraded to the closest of 5% or 10%. Face validity was scored on a Likert scale ranked from 1 to 7. Test-retest reliability was determined using the Fleiss kappa coefficient. Internal consistency was assessed with Cronbach’s alpha. Concurrent criterion validity was assessed against the Quality Appraisal for Cadaveric Studies scale. RESULTS : The final Biomechanics Objective Basic science Quality Assessment Tool (BOBQAT) score included 15 items and was shown to be valid, reliable, and consistent. Five items had a CVI of 1.0; 10 items had a CVI of 0.875. For weighting, 5 items received a weight of 10%, and 10 items a weight of 5%. CVR was 1.0 for 6 items and 0.75 for 9 items. For face validity, all items achieved a score above 5. For test-retest reliability, almost-perfect test-retest reliability was observed for 10 items, substantial agreement for 4 items, and moderate agreement for 1 item. For internal consistency, Cronbach’s alpha was calculated to be 0.71. For concurrent criterion validity, Pearson’s product-moment correlation was 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.38-0.70, P = .0001). CONCLUSIONS : Cadaveric biomechanical and laboratory research can be quantitatively scored for quality based on the inclusion of a clear and answerable purpose, demographics, specimen condition, appropriate bone density, reproducible technique, appropriate outcome measures, appropriate loading conditions, appropriate load magnitude, cyclic loading, sample size calculation, proper statistical analysis, results consistent with methods, limitations considered, conclusions based on results, and disclosure of funding and potential conflicts. CLINICAL RELEVANCE : Study quality assessments are important to evaluate internal and external validity and reliability and to identify methodological flaws and misleading conclusions. The BOBQAT score will help not only in the critical appraisal of cadaveric biomechanical studies but also in guiding the designs of such research endeavors. en_US
dc.description.department Anatomy en_US
dc.description.department Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering en_US
dc.description.department Orthopaedic Surgery en_US
dc.description.embargo 2025-08-01
dc.description.librarian hj2024 en_US
dc.description.sdg SDG-03:Good heatlh and well-being en_US
dc.description.uri https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/arthroscopy-the-journal-of-arthroscopic-and-related-surgery en_US
dc.identifier.citation Hohmann, E., Paschos, N., Keough, N. et al. 2024, 'Cadaveric biomechanical laboratory research can be quantitatively scored for quality with the biomechanics objective basic science quality assessment tool: the BOBQAT score', Arthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery, vol. 40, no. 8, pp. 2263-2272, doi : 10.1016/j.arthro.2024.01.003. en_US
dc.identifier.issn 0749-8063 (print)
dc.identifier.issn 1526-3231 (online)
dc.identifier.other 10.1016/j.arthro.2024.01.003
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/2263/97857
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Elsevier en_US
dc.rights © 2024 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Notice : this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopy and Related Surgery. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. A definitive version was subsequently published in Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopy and Related Surgery, vol. 40, no. 8, pp. 2263-2272, 2024, doi : 10.1016/j.arthro.2024.01.003. en_US
dc.subject Cadaveric biomechanical laboratory en_US
dc.subject Basic science biomechanical studies en_US
dc.subject Study quality assessments en_US
dc.subject Internal validity en_US
dc.subject External validity en_US
dc.subject Reliability en_US
dc.subject Biomechanics objective basic science quality assessment tool (BOBQAT) en_US
dc.subject SDG-03: Good health and well-being en_US
dc.title Cadaveric biomechanical laboratory research can be quantitatively scored for quality with the biomechanics objective basic science quality assessment tool: the BOBQAT score en_US
dc.type Postprint Article en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record