title: A comparison of the PEDro and Downs and Black quality assessment tools using the acquired brain injury intervention literature.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The objective of this study was to examine the correlation between the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) and the Downs and Black (D&B) quality assessment scale and the PEDro and a modified D&B assessment scores in a research synthesis of the ABI literature.
  
  
  METHODS
  A systematic review of the literature from 1980-2007 was conducted looking at treatment interventions following an ABI published in peer-reviewed English language journals. Of the articles chosen for inclusion in the study, 165 were identified as randomised controlled trials (RCT). All RCTs were scored using two quality assessment tools: the PEDro and D&B quality assessment scales. Items from these two scales were compared to identify which questions addressed similar information.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The association between the overall PEDro and D&B scores was moderately high (r = 0.71, p < 0.01) indicating a significant relationship between these two quality assessment tools. When considering the modified D&B scores, which contained a subset of questions deemed most comparable to the PEDro scale, the correlation between the two was also moderately high (r = 0.68, p < 0.01).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Further analysis is required to investigate the strength of the relationship between these two scales in the assessment of RCTs.
authors: Aging, Rehabilitation, and Geriatric Care, Lawson Research Institute, St. Joseph's Health Care London, London, ON, Canada N6C 5J1. JoAnne.Aubut@sjhc.london.on.ca
authors: Jo-Anne L
authors: JA
authors: Aubut
authors: Shawn
authors: S
authors: Marshall
authors: Mark
authors: M
authors: Bayley
authors: Robert W
authors: RW
authors: Teasell
mesh_terms: D001930:Brain Injuries / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000534:rehabilitation; D004185:Disability Evaluation; D006801:Humans; D026741:Physical Therapy Modalities; D016896:Treatment Outcome