Searchable Title

Testing the Cambridge Quality Checklists on a Review of Disrupted Families and Crime. Copyright: John Wiley & Sons.

Reference Type

Journal Article

Authors, Section

Jolliffe, D.; Murray, J.; Farrington, D.; Vannick, C.

Title, Section

Testing the Cambridge Quality Checklists on a Review of Disrupted Families and Crime. Copyright: John Wiley & Sons.

Publication Year

2012

Journal Title

Criminal Behavior and Mental Health

Volume

22

Issue

5

Pages

303-14

Availability

online

PMID

PMID: 23192977

DOI

10.1002/cbm.1837

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews of the relationship between non-manipulated factors (e.g. low empathy) and offending are becoming more common, and it is important to consider the methodological quality of studies included in such reviews. AIMS: To assess aspects of the reliability and validity of the Cambridge Quality Checklists, a set of three measures for examining the methodological quality of studies included in systematic reviews of risk factors for offending. METHODS: All 60 studies in a systematic review of disrupted families and offending were coded on the CQC and codes compared with the effect sizes derived from the studies. RESULTS: Overall, the CQC was easy to score, and the relevant information was available in most studies. The scales had high inter-rater reliability. Only 13 studies scored high on the Checklist of Correlates, 18 scored highly on the Checklist of Risk Factors and none scored highly on the Checklist of Causal Risk Factors. Generally, studies that were of lower quality had higher effect sizes. CONCLUSIONS: The CQC could be a useful method of assessing the methodological quality of studies of risk factors for offending but might benefit from additional conceptual work, changes to the wording of some scales and additional levels for scoring.

Share

COinS