Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tools for Systematic Reviews
Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tools for Evidence Synthesis · Also known as: JBI, Joanna Briggs
JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute) Critical Appraisal Tools are a comprehensive suite of design-specific quality assessment instruments developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute (University of Adelaide, Australia) since 1998. Unlike single-tool approaches, JBI offers over 15 separate checklists tailored to RCTs, cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional surveys, qualitative research, diagnostic accuracy, and economic evaluations. JBI tools are widely used in systematic reviews, particularly in healthcare, nursing, and public health.
Read the full method
Sign in with a free account to read this section.
Method map
The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.
When to use it
JBI tools are standard for systematic reviews conducted within evidence-based practice frameworks (nursing, allied health, public health). Use when appraising study quality across diverse designs, when you need design-specific criteria, or when your organization adopts JBI methodology for evidence synthesis. JBI is particularly prominent in Australia and internationally among evidence-based practice networks.
Strengths & limitations
- Comprehensive toolkit with design-specific tools for RCTs (11 items), cohort (11 items), case-control (10 items), qualitative (10 items), diagnostic accuracy (14 items), economic evaluation (16 items), prevalence (9 items), and other designs
- Transparent, operationalized criteria; each question includes guidance reducing ambiguity and improving inter-rater reliability
- Yes/No/Unclear format captures uncertainty without forcing binary judgments; unclear answers prompt further investigation or author contact
- Free, publicly available tools and software (JBI Systematic Review Manager) facilitate global adoption
- International recognition and use; particularly strong in nursing, allied health, and public health research networks
- Proliferation of tools (>15 specialized checklists) can confuse users; selecting the 'correct' JBI tool requires study design expertise
- Variable evidence for reliability and validity across JBI tools; some tools have undergone formal psychometric testing while others have not
- Yes/No/Unclear scoring lacks granularity; a study meeting all criteria at a minimal level scores the same as a study meeting all criteria exemplarily
- Some criteria are subjective; for example, 'appropriate' sample size or 'adequate' follow-up duration; JBI guidance sometimes lacks specific numerical thresholds
- Less well-known internationally than Cochrane RoB 2 or CASP; adoption varies by country and discipline
Frequently asked
How do I choose between JBI tools when a study has multiple components (e.g., RCT with qualitative interviews)?
Apply the tool corresponding to the study's primary design or outcome. For example, if an RCT includes qualitative interviews as a secondary component, use the JBI RCT tool to appraise the quantitative results. If the qualitative data are equally weighted, consider applying both tools and reporting both scores.
What does 'Unclear' mean, and should I contact authors when responses are unclear?
'Unclear' means the published paper does not provide sufficient information to answer the question; it does not necessarily reflect poor methodology. For systematic reviews, contacting authors to clarify methodology is recommended, particularly for critical quality items affecting bias risk.
Can I use JBI tools for rapid evidence reviews or scoping reviews?
Yes, JBI tools are concise (10–14 items) and can be administered quickly (10–15 minutes per study). However, rapid reviews sometimes use simplified quality screening (Yes/No for key items) rather than full JBI appraisal to save time.
How do JBI tools compare to Cochrane RoB 2 or CASP?
All three are rigorous, design-specific tools. Cochrane RoB 2 is more granular for RCTs (5 domains, signalling questions); CASP is more accessible for clinician training (11 items, practical format); JBI offers the broadest toolkit (15+ design-specific tools) and is particularly strong in nursing/allied health. Choose based on your field and audience.
Is a study that scores 100% on JBI tool automatically eligible for inclusion in my systematic review?
No. Quality assessment informs synthesis decisions but does not alone determine eligibility. Eligibility is based on population, intervention, and outcome fit (PICOS criteria). A high-quality study may be excluded if it does not address your research question. Conversely, a lower-quality study may be included if it is the only evidence for a specific outcome.
Sources
- Joanna Briggs Institute. (2017). Critical Appraisal Tools. University of Adelaide, South Australia. www.jbi.global/critical-appraisal-tools link ↗
How to cite this page
ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tools for Evidence Synthesis. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/research-methodology/joanna-briggs-critical-appraisal
Which method?
Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.
- CASP RCT ChecklistResearch Methodology↔ compare
- COSMIN ChecklistResearch Methodology↔ compare
- Newcastle-Ottawa ScaleResearch Methodology↔ compare