The assessment of methodological quality (MQ) in biomedical research is an area that has undergone dynamic development in the last 20 years on a global scale. MQ can be defined as a multidimensional and complex construct composed of items and domains. Different research groups have proposed tools for its assessment, among which our team is included with the development of the MInCir scales. Over the years, we have developed and validated scales to assess MQ in treatment or therapeutic procedure studies (MInCir-T), in diagnostic studies (MInCir-Dg), and prognosis studies (MInCir-Pr in its two versions, MInCir-Pr1 and MInCir-Pr2). However, as is the case with any measurement instrument, it is crucial to specify in a detailed and precise manner how it is applied, aiming to standardize measurements and minimize information biases. A detailed description is provided for the 4 domains and 8 items comprising the MInCir-Pr2 scale, specifying for each of them the characteristics to be assessed and scored in primary prognosis articles. The scale total score ranges from 7 to 60 points, with a cutoff point of 33 points (dichotomous) to define the MQ construct. This cutoff point allows classification into either adequate or high MQ (when the evaluated article receives a score of 33 points or higher), and inadequate or low MQ if the score is 32 points or less. The aim of this article was to elucidate and clarify the application of the MInCir-Pr2 scale for MQ in prognosis studies, through a guide intended to standardize MQ measurements using the MInCir-Pr2 scale, with the goal of enhance both intra- and inter- observer reliability.
KEY WORDS: Scales; Weights and Measures; Reproducibility of Results; Validity of results; Methodological quality; Prognosis.
