Skip to main content


Table 2 Overview of the suitability of and critical reflections on the solution strategies

From: How to tackle the conundrum of quality appraisal in systematic reviews of normative literature/information? Analysing the problems of three possible strategies (translation of a German paper)

Solution strategyCriteriaPossible suitabilityCritical reflections
1Reporting criteria (predominantly)SRs of ethical conclusions• One-sidedness
• Lack of differentiation in global appraisals
• Possible mixing of reporting criteria and content-related quality criteria
2(Procedural) quality assurance criteria (or decision not to carry out an independent appraisal)SRs of ethical issues
SRs of ethical concepts
SRs of ethical norms
SRs of ethical recommendations
Only with descriptive aims:
SRs of ethical conclusions
SRs of ethical arguments
• The limitations of the peer review process and other quality controls
• Aim-dependency
• Problematic content quality
3Content-related quality criteriaAll, but particularly SRs of ethical arguments and SRs with a (strong) normative aim• Position of the appraisal within the methodological process
• Implementing existing criteria in the appraisal of normative information
• Ethical relevance as an attribute of quality?