Checklist to Evaluate Methodological Quality of Primary Care Research Networks
| Content validity | 1. Do authors report that they reviewed relevant literature to identify previous research that have been done in the area and/or previous tools? |
| 2. Do authors report the involvement of experts/peer groups in the development of the tool and/or item-selection/item-reduction process? | |
| 3. Do authors report the outcomes of the level of agreement among experts reflecting the content relevance of the proposed measurement areas/items? | |
| Reliability | 4. Do the authors describe the tool and measurement method in sufficient detail to permit replication? |
| 5. Do authors report the results of intra and/or inter-reliability tests? | |
| Feasibility | 6. Do authors report that the acceptability and measurability of the measurement items and feasibility of the tool were tested in a pilot study |
| 7. If the authors did not perform a pilot study, has the tool been applied once otherwise? | |
| 8. Do authors report other (empirical) evidence that the measurement quality of the tool has been examined? | |
| Practice investment | 9. Do authors provide sufficient information to evaluate the time investment? |
| 10. Do authors provide information about the costs of an assessment/evaluation using this tool? |
All questions were answered as yes or no.