Critical Appraisal วิจารณญาณ

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Deriving Biological Inferences From Epidemiologic Studies.
Advertisements

Causality Causality Hill’s Criteria Cross sectional studies.
Causality Inferences. Objectives: 1. To understand the concept of risk factors and outcome in a scientific way. 2. To understand and comprehend each and.
1 Case-Control Study Design Two groups are selected, one of people with the disease (cases), and the other of people with the same general characteristics.
STUDY DESIGN CASE SERIES AND CROSS-SECTIONAL
Bias, Confounding and the Role of Chance
BIAS AND CONFOUNDING Nigel Paneth. HYPOTHESIS FORMULATION AND ERRORS IN RESEARCH All analytic studies must begin with a clearly formulated hypothesis.
Estimation and Reporting of Heterogeneity of Treatment Effects in Observational Comparative Effectiveness Research Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare.
THE NEWCASTLE CRITICAL APPRAISAL WORKSHEET
Writing a Research Protocol Michael Aronica MD Program Director Internal Medicine-Pediatrics.
Epidemiology & Critical Thinking D. Morse st Avenue Tel: Office Hours: 4:00-5:00 (M & W)
Postgraduate Course 6. Evidence based management: What is the best available evidence?
Lecture 8 Objective 20. Describe the elements of design of observational studies: case reports/series.
Causation and the Rules of Inference Classes 4 and 5.
Evidence-Based Medicine 3 More Knowledge and Skills for Critical Reading Karen E. Schetzina, MD, MPH.
Research Design. Research is based on Scientific Method Propose a hypothesis that is testable Objective observations are collected Results are analyzed.
CHP400: Community Health Program- lI Research Methodology STUDY DESIGNS Observational / Analytical Studies Case Control Studies Present: Disease Past:
Causal inference Afshin Ostovar Bushehr University of Medical Sciences Bushehr, /4/20151.
Lecture 6 Objective 16. Describe the elements of design of observational studies: (current) cohort studies (longitudinal studies). Discuss the advantages.
 Is there a comparison? ◦ Are the groups really comparable?  Are the differences being reported real? ◦ Are they worth reporting? ◦ How much confidence.
Instructor Resource Chapter 5 Copyright © Scott B. Patten, Permission granted for classroom use with Epidemiology for Canadian Students: Principles,
Systematic Review Module 7: Rating the Quality of Individual Studies Meera Viswanathan, PhD RTI-UNC EPC.
Techniques of research control: -Extraneous variables (confounding) are: The variables which could have an unwanted effect on the dependent variable under.
Field Epidemiology Fall 2000 Patty Kissinger, PhD John L. Clayton, MPH Megan O’Brien, MPH.
URBDP 591 I Lecture 3: Research Process Objectives What are the major steps in the research process? What is an operational definition of variables? What.
Lecture 7 Objective 18. Describe the elements of design of observational studies: case ‑ control studies (retrospective studies). Discuss the advantages.
A short introduction to epidemiology Chapter 10: Interpretation Neil Pearce Centre for Public Health Research Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand.
Study Designs for Clinical and Epidemiological Research Carla J. Alvarado, MS, CIC University of Wisconsin-Madison (608)
Reading Health Research Critically The first four guides for reading a clinical journal apply to any article, consider: the title the author the summary.
Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2008 Intelligent Consumer Chapter 14 This multimedia product and its contents are protected under copyright law. The following.
Guidelines for Critically Reading the Medical Literature John L. Clayton, MPH.
Design of Clinical Research Studies ASAP Session by: Robert McCarter, ScD Dir. Biostatistics and Informatics, CNMC
Unit 11: Evaluating Epidemiologic Literature. Unit 11 Learning Objectives: 1. Recognize uniform guidelines used in preparing manuscripts for publication.
1 Causation in epidemiology, confounding and bias Imre Janszky Faculty of Medicine NTNU.
Measures of disease frequency Simon Thornley. Measures of Effect and Disease Frequency Aims – To define and describe the uses of common epidemiological.
Chapter 12 Quantitative Questions and Procedures.
Assessing Impact: Approaches and Designs
BIAS AND CONFOUNDING Nigel Paneth.
Article Dissection Patients with Multiple Sclerosis and Parkinson’s Disease Undergoing Upper Cervical Chiropractic Care.
Research Problems, Purposes, & Hypotheses
Critically Appraising a Medical Journal Article
Selecting the Best Measure for Your Study
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Overview of the Scientific Method
Present: Disease Past: Exposure
CLINICAL PROTOCOL DEVELOPMENT
Chapter 12 Single-Case Evaluation Designs
Interpreting numbers – more tricky bits
Randomized Trials: A Brief Overview
BIAS AND CONFOUNDING
SUSSER’S CAUSAL CRITERIA
Lecture 4: Meta-analysis
AXIS critical Appraisal of cross sectional Studies
Critical Reading of Clinical Study Results
Chapter 6 Research Validity.
Correlation and Causality
Improved Patient Outcomes Best Available Clinical Evidence Patient’s
Assessing Bias 1.
Introduction.
Evaluating the Role of Bias
Introduction to Hypothesis Testing
Case-Control Studies.
Bias, Confounding and the Role of Chance
Relationship Relation: Association: real and spurious Statistical:
HEC508 Applied Epidemiology
Dr Luis E Cuevas – LSTM Julia Critchley
Scientific Method Review.
Enhancing Causal Inference in Observational Studies
Enhancing Causal Inference in Observational Studies
Presentation transcript:

Critical Appraisal วิจารณญาณ โครงการการจัดการปัจจัยเสี่ยงและปัจจัยเอื้อต่อสุขภาพ ตามผลการวิเคราะห์ภาระโรคในพื้นที่เขตสุขภาพที่ 12 Critical Appraisal วิจารณญาณ ดร.นพ.วรสิทธิ์ ศรศรีวิชัย มูลนิธิสุขภาพภาคใต้ สถาบันการจัดการระบบสุขภาพภาคใต้ มหาวิทยาลัยสงขลานครินทร์

Research Objectives Is there a clear statement of research objectives and/or hypotheses? Does the study address a question that has clinical and/or public health relevance?

Study Design Does the study design appropriate for the objectives/hypotheses? Does the study represent an advance over prior approach? How?

Outcome Variable What is the outcome? Is the outcome variable relevant to the objectives? What criteria are used to define the outcome? Is the determination of the presence or absence of disease accurate?

Independent Variable How many exposure variables are being studied? How many potential confounders are considered, and why? How is presence or absence of exposure determined? Is the assessment of exposure likely to be precise and accurate? Is there attempt to quantify the amount or duration of exposure?

Method of Analysis Are the statistical methods used in the analysis appropriate to the type of variables being studied? Is the sample size adequate to answer the research question? Have the assumption underlying the statistical tests been met? Has chance be evaluated as the potential explanation of the result?

Possible Source of Bias Is the method of subjects selection likely to have biased the result? Is the measurement of either exposure or outcome likely to be biased? Have the investigators considered whether confounders could account for the observed result? In what direction would each potential bias influence the result?

Interpretation of Result How large is the observed effect? Is there evidence of dose response relationship? Are the effect biologically plausible? If the finding is negative, was there sufficient statistical power to detect the effect?

How the Result Can Be Used Are the findings consistent with the other studies of the same question? Can the findings be generalized to the target population in general?

Selection Bias E+ D+ D- E- E+ D+ D- E- E+ D+ D- E- E+ D+ D- E-

Misclassification Exposure misclassification : non differential Bias toward the null or dilution of effect D+ D- E+ a b E- c d

Misclassification Exposure misclassification : differential Bias toward/away from the null : Recall bias D+ D- E+ a b E- c d

Misclassification Disease misclassification : non differential Decrease power D+ D- E+ a b E- c d

Misclassification Disease misclassification : differential Bias toward/away from the null D+ D- E+ a b E- c d

Causal Criteria Strength Consistency Specificity Temporality Biological gradient Plausibility Coherence Experimental evidence Analogy

Hierarchy of Population and Inference External population External Validity (Generalizability) Issue of population difference Target population Internal validity Issue of bias Actual population Statistical inference Issue of chance Study population (Sample)