Quality appraisal of spatial epidemiology and health geography research: A scoping review of systematic reviews

Sarah M Wood; Laura Alston; Hannah Beks; Kevin Mc Namara; Neil T Coffee; Robyn A Clark; Anna Wong Shee; Vincent L Versace

doi:10.1016/j.healthplace.2023.103108

Quality appraisal of spatial epidemiology and health geography research: A scoping review of systematic reviews

Health Place. 2023 Sep:83:103108. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2023.103108. Epub 2023 Aug 29.

Authors

Sarah M Wood¹, Laura Alston², Hannah Beks³, Kevin Mc Namara⁴, Neil T Coffee⁵, Robyn A Clark⁶, Anna Wong Shee⁴, Vincent L Versace⁴

Affiliations

¹ Deakin Rural Health, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Warrnambool Campus, Vic, Australia. Electronic address: [email protected].
² Deakin Rural Health, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Warrnambool Campus, Vic, Australia; Research Unit, Colac Area Health, Colac, Vic, Australia.
³ Deakin Rural Health, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Warrnambool Campus, Vic, Australia.
⁴ Deakin Rural Health, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Warrnambool Campus, Vic, Australia; Grampians Health, Ballarat, Vic, Australia.
⁵ Deakin Rural Health, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Warrnambool Campus, Vic, Australia; Australian Centre for Housing Research, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
⁶ Caring Futures Institute, Flinders University, SA, Australia; Southern Adelaide Health Care Services, SA, Australia.

PMID: 37651961
DOI: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2023.103108

Abstract

A scoping review of peer-reviewed literature was conducted to understand how systematic reviews assess the methodological quality of spatial epidemiology and health geography research. Fifty-nine eligible reviews were identified and included. Variations in the use of quality appraisal tools were found. Reviews applied existing quality appraisal tools with no adaptations (n = 32; 54%), existing quality appraisal tools with adaptations (n = 9; 15%), adapted tools or methods from other reviews (n = 13; 22%), and developed new quality appraisal tools for the review (n = 5; 8%). Future research should focus on developing and validating a quality appraisal tool that evaluates the spatial methodology within studies.

Keywords: Critical appraisal; Health geography; Methodological quality; Quality appraisal; Spatial epidemiology; Systematic review.

Publication types

Review

MeSH terms

Geography
Humans
Systematic Reviews as Topic*