Skip to main content

Table 1 Criteria list for the methodological quality assessment of the studies and definitions of the criteria

From: What is actually measured in process evaluations for worksite health promotion programs: a systematic review

Effect evaluations
  Internal validity/study design
V1 Randomization procedure Positive if a random (unpredictable) assignment procedure sequence of subjects to the study groups was used and if there was a clear description of the procedure and adequate performance of the randomization
V2 Similarity of companies Positive if they controlled for variability in included companies
V3 Similarity of study groups Positive if the study groups were similar at the beginning of the study
V4 Dropout Positive if the percentage of dropouts during the study period did not exceed 20% for short-term follow-up (≤ 3 months) or 30% for long-term follow-up (> 3 months) and adequately described
V5 Timing of outcome measurement Positive if timing of outcome assessment was identical for intervention and control groups and for all important outcomes assessments.
V6 Blinding Positive if the person performing the assessments was blinded to the group assignment
V7 Co-interventions Positive if co-interventions were avoided or comparable.
V8 Outcome Positive when data on outcome was selected with standardized methods of acceptable quality
  Descriptive criteria
D1 Eligibility criteria (in- and exclusion criteria) Positive if in- and exclusion criteria of participants were specified
D2 Baseline characteristics Positive if an adequate description of the study groups was given for demographic variables: gender, age, type of work, hours a week working, education level, baseline main outcome measures
D3 Company characteristics Positive if an adequate description of the included companies was given (type of industry, organizational characteristics)
D4 Intervention Positive if an adequate description was given of the interventions(s): number of intervention aspects, type of interventions, frequency of sessions, intensity of intervention(s)
D5 Follow-up Positive if a follow-up of 6 months or longer was described.
  Analysis
A1 Sample size Positive if an adequate sample size calculation was described
A2 Confounders Positive if the analysis controlled for potential confounders
A3 Intention to treat Positive if the intervention and control subjects were analyzed according to the group belonging to their initial assignment, irrespective of non-compliance and co-interventions.
Process evaluations  
T1 Model used for evaluation Positive if a theoretical framework for the evaluation was used and adequately described.
T2 Level of evaluation Positive if implementation was evaluated on 2 or more levels (i.e. macro, meso, micro)
T3 Definition of outcome measure (process components) Positive if the definition of the outcome measures (process variables and barriers and/or facilitators) were accurately described
T4 Reported process variables a. Positive if four or more process evaluation variables are evaluated (in process evaluation)
   b. Positive if barriers or facilitators on 1 or more levels are presented
T5 Data collection Positive if 2 or more techniques for data collection were used (triangulation).
T6 Timing of data collection Positive if measurements of barriers and/or facilitators were performed pre-, during and after implementation.
T7 Quantitative outcome measures Positive if data on quantitative outcome was selected with methods of acceptable quality and data on multiple process components was measured.
T8 Qualitative data a. Positive if study design for qualitative data (theoretical framework, participant selection, setting, data collection) were adequately described
   b. Positive if qualitative data was analyzed by two researchers.
T9 Outcome related to implementation of intervention Positive if outcomes (barriers and/or facilitators) are related to the quality of implementation