You may use the Therapy/RCT Appraisal sheet and answer the 1a question as non-randomized

http://www.cebm.net/critical-appraisal/

I find this article interesting because its focus is about your  question ( even if it is not a brand new paper) 

http://jech.bmj.com/content/52/6/377.full.pdf

Hi Gaby

The Cochrane collaboration have developed a tool for non-randomized studies of intervention:

https://sites.google.com/site/riskofbiastool/

best wishes,

Britta

Hello Gaby

we often used the checklist by Downs and Black

http://jech.bmj.com/content/52/6/377.abstract

Thank you all, each one so helpful. Wishing you all a good week ahead

And, of course, never forget to check Equator-Network. They are a resource for reporting guidelines, but it is always useful.

Hi Gaby, Newcastle-Ottawa scale is a common tool used to critically appraise observational studies. http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp

However, Down and Black is a better tools, but normally used when there is RCTs included along with the observational studies

Good luck

Dear partners. I always use the PEDro scale, which includes items such as: intention to treat analysis, randomization, blinding, baselne comparisons, etc. I think this tool allow us to undertake the most comprehensive analysis. I strongly recommend this scale.

I think the answer is that there in no 'best' there are a range of tools and some are 'better' than others.. Validity and reliability are the key elements and most of these mentioned have been validated.  It might be useful to know what specific study design youre considering and also which clinical topic?

Dear Zbys Fedorowicz, may you please specify what you mean by specific study design?

The clinical topic is regarding vascular closure devices in PCIs. 

Hello, i find this interaction very useful. however, I am doing a systematic review for my thesis on palliative care.  one of the articles i came across used a stepped-wedge cluster non-randomized trial design. i need to do a  methodological assessment of this method but i can not find a quality appraisal tool that fits that description. Does anyone have an idea of any published appraisal tool that fits this description?

The methodological quality assessment tools for preclinical and clinical studies, systematic review and meta-analysis, and clinical practice guideline: a systematic review. The study over-viewed all quality assessment methods currently available.

Good Luck ...

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jebm.12141/full

I have used MINORS and found it to be very helpful with appropriate adaptation.

Cochrane have released their own instrument (ROBINS-I) available at https://sites.google.com/site/riskofbiastool/ 

Gaby do you mean a NON RCT or a Non randomised BUT controlled study? ie CCT would fit that definition ie quasi randomised and the Cochrane Risk of bias tool would work. If its the former then there are several study designs that fit and you have the suggestion above. 

U can use ROB-2 of Cochrane Collaboration for Non randomised study also.

True the ROB-2 tool of CCT would be the best one to assess.

https://sites.google.com/site/riskofbiastool/welcome/rob-2-0-tool/current-version-of-rob-2?authuser=0

Is HAT good for appraising non-randomised and non-clinical study types?

My review includes studies that are non-RCT and non-clinical. Which is the best tool for appraising these types of studies?