1 / 11

Critical Appraisal of a Paper

Enhance your EBM skills with structured clinical questions, systematic evidence search, and critical appraisal using GATE Frame, RAMMbo, and CASP tools. Learn to evaluate research validity, results, and local applicability for optimal decision-making.

hoag
Download Presentation

Critical Appraisal of a Paper

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Critical Appraisal of a Paper Feedback

  2. Critical Appraisal • Full Reference • Authors (Surname & Abbreviations) • Year of publication • Full Title • Journal • Volume • Page numbers

  3. EBM Basic Skills • Formulate structured clinical question • PICO(D) • Search for evidence • Systematic • Select best evidence • Critically appraise • GATE Frame • RAMMbo • CASP • ATAGLANCE

  4. Diagnostic tests Prognosis Therapy Patients’ Preferences Cross sectional study Cohort study RCT Qualitative research Research Design BMJ 1997;315:1636

  5. CASP • Critical Appraisal Skills Programme • Are the results Valid? • What are the results? • Will the results help locally?

  6. Are the Results Valid? • Did the trial address a clearly focused issue? Population Intervention Comparator Outcomes • Was assignment random? • Were all the patients accounted for? • Blinding? Patients Health workers Study personnel • Were the groups similar from randomisation? • Were the groups treated the same other than the intervention?

  7. What are the Results? • How large was the treatment effect? • How precise was the estimate of the effect? • Confidence limits.

  8. Will the Results Help Locally? • Can the results be applied locally? • Were all the important clinical outcomes considered? • Are the benefits with the harms and costs?

  9. ATAGLANCE • Acronym • Title • Aim • Groups • Limbs – Intervention v Comparator • Absolute Risk Reduction • Number Needed to Treat (NNT) • Clinical Conclusion • Education for patients/carers

  10. Diagnostic tests Prognosis Therapy Patients’ Preferences Cross sectional study Cohort study RCT Qualitative research Research Design BMJ 1997;315:1636

More Related