Critical Appraisal of an Article by Dr. I. Selvaraj B. SC. ,M. B. B. S

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
What is a review? An article which looks at a question or subject and seeks to summarise and bring together evidence on a health topic.
Advertisements

Action Research Not traditional educational research often research tests theory not practical Teacher research in classrooms and/or schools/districts.
8. Evidence-based management Step 3: Critical appraisal of studies
Reading the Dental Literature
Critical Appraisal Dr Samira Alsenany Dr SA 2012 Dr Samira alsenany.
THE NEWCASTLE CRITICAL APPRAISAL WORKSHEET
Critical appraisal of the literature Michael Ferenczi Head of Year 4 Head of Molecular Medicine Section, National Heart and Lung Institute.
Evidenced Based Practice; Systematic Reviews; Critiquing Research
Business research methods: data sources
By Dr. Ahmed Mostafa Assist. Prof. of anesthesia & I.C.U. Evidence-based medicine.
Research Proposal by Dr. I. Selvaraj B. SC. ,M. B. B. S. ,M. D. ,D. P
WRITING A RESEARCH PROPORSAL
Cohort Studies Hanna E. Bloomfield, MD, MPH Professor of Medicine Associate Chief of Staff, Research Minneapolis VA Medical Center.
Reading Science Critically Debi A. LaPlante, PhD Associate Director, Division on Addictions.
How to Write a Scientific Paper Hann-Chorng Kuo Department of Urology Buddhist Tzu Chi General Hospital.
Writing a Research Proposal
Are the results valid? Was the validity of the included studies appraised?
RESEARCH A systematic quest for undiscovered truth A way of thinking
Critical Reading. Critical Appraisal Definition: assessment of methodological quality If you are deciding whether a paper is worth reading – do so on.
Reading Scientific Papers Shimae Soheilipour
EBD for Dental Staff Seminar 2: Core Critical Appraisal Dominic Hurst evidenced.qm.
Program Evaluation. Program evaluation Methodological techniques of the social sciences social policy public welfare administration.
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE
Systematic Reviews.
Evidence Based Medicine Meta-analysis and systematic reviews Ross Lawrenson.
Evidence-Based Public Health Nancy Allee, MLS, MPH University of Michigan November 6, 2004.
EBC course 10 April 2003 Critical Appraisal of the Clinical Literature: The Big Picture Cynthia R. Long, PhD Associate Professor Palmer Center for Chiropractic.
Appraising Randomized Clinical Trials and Systematic Reviews October 12, 2012 Mary H. Palmer, PhD, RN, C, FAAN, AGSF University of North Carolina at Chapel.
Literature searching & critical appraisal Chihaya Koriyama August 15, 2011 (Lecture 2)
Systematic reviews to support public policy: An overview Jeff Valentine University of Louisville AfrEA – NONIE – 3ie Cairo.
How to read a scientific paper
Criteria to assess quality of observational studies evaluating the incidence, prevalence, and risk factors of chronic diseases Minnesota EPC Clinical Epidemiology.
Landmark Trials: Recommendations for Interpretation and Presentation Julianna Burzynski, PharmD, BCOP, BCPS Heme/Onc Clinical Pharmacy Specialist 11/29/07.
Clinical Writing for Interventional Cardiologists.
How to write a scientific article Nikolaos P. Polyzos M.D. PhD.
Critical Reading. Critical Appraisal Definition: assessment of methodological quality If you are deciding whether a paper is worth reading – do so on.
Study designs. Kate O’Donnell General Practice & Primary Care.
Sifting through the evidence Sarah Fradsham. Types of Evidence Primary Literature Observational studies Case Report Case Series Case Control Study Cohort.
EBM --- Journal Reading Presenter :呂宥達 Date : 2005/10/27.
BY DR. HAMZA ABDULGHANI MBBS,DPHC,ABFM,FRCGP (UK), Diploma MedED(UK) Associate Professor DEPT. OF MEDICAL EDUCATION COLLEGE OF MEDICINE June 2012 Writing.
Research article structure: Where can reporting guidelines help? Iveta Simera The EQUATOR Network workshop 10 October 2012, Freiburg, Germany.
EVALUATING u After retrieving the literature, you have to evaluate or critically appraise the evidence for its validity and applicability to your patient.
LITERATURE REVIEW ARCHELLE JANE C. CALLEJO, PTRP,MSPH.
G. Biondi Zoccai – Ricerca in cardiologia What to expect? Core modules IntroductionIntroduction Finding out relevant literatureFinding out relevant literature.
Unit 11: Evaluating Epidemiologic Literature. Unit 11 Learning Objectives: 1. Recognize uniform guidelines used in preparing manuscripts for publication.
Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Chapter 1 Research: An Overview.
Is a meta-analysis right for me? Jaime Peters June 2014.
EBM --- Journal Reading Presenter :黃美琴 Date : 2005/10/27.
Source: S. Unchern,  Research is not been completed until the results have been published.  “You don’t write because you want to say something,
CRITICALLY APPRAISING EVIDENCE Lisa Broughton, PhD, RN, CCRN.
Cohort Study Evaluation Irina Ibraghimova
Copyright © Springer Publishing Company, LLC. All Rights Reserved. EVIDENCE-BASED TEACHING IN NURSING – Chapter 15 –
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF A JOURNAL
Research Skills.
Critically Appraising a Medical Journal Article
Using internet information critically Reading papers Presenting papers
Scientific Writing Top 5:
Writing the research protocol
EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE
Purpose of Critical Appraisal
AXIS critical Appraisal of cross sectional Studies
Chapter 7 The Hierarchy of Evidence
Critical Reading of Clinical Study Results
Reading Research Papers-A Basic Guide to Critical Analysis
Literature searching & critical appraisal
Research Proposal. Research refers to a search for knowledge Research means a scientific and systematic search for pertinent information on a specific.
What is a review? An article which looks at a question or subject and seeks to summarise and bring together evidence on a health topic. Ask What is a review?
Managerial Decision Making and Evaluating Research
Evidence-Based Public Health
Presentation transcript:

Critical Appraisal of an Article by Dr. I. Selvaraj B. SC. ,M. B. B. S Critical Appraisal of an Article by Dr.I.Selvaraj B.SC.,M.B.B.S.,M.D.,D.P.H.,D.I.H PGCH&FW(NIHFW, NewDelhi) Indian Railways Medical Service (VRS) Assistant Professor Public Health Consultant Community medicine specialist Health &Family welfare consultant Industrial health consultant Epidemiologist

Sir/Madam This presentation is dedicated to super course Sir/Madam This presentation is dedicated to super course. To practice medicine we need evidence. Of course Critical appraisal of an article will give evidence .It needs practice. The young doctors without apprehension to analyze the published article to test trustworthiness, they have to be trained . I hope my material will be useful to them as a catalyst. My best wishes to the super course team Dr.I.Selvaraj, IRMS(Rtd)

What is Critical Appraisal? Critical appraisal is the process of carefully And systematically analyze the research paper to judge its trustworthiness, and its value and relevance in a particular context. “Critical appraisal is the process of systematically examining research evidence to assess its validity, results, and relevance before using it to inform a decision” (Hill and Spittlehouse, 2001, p.1).

When should you Critically Appraise? Conducting literature reviews for grant proposals for new project Evaluating the effectiveness, costs, and benefits of health programs, Intervention etc., Establishing new innovative in the health programs To set right the lacunae while Implementing health policies policies and Public health decision making

The Critical Appraisal aims to help people develop the necessary skills to make sense of scientific evidence based on validity, results and relevance.

Research involves gathering of data , collection of data and analysis of the data to produce meaningful information. However, many of the research are not in good quality and many studies are biased and their results are untrue. This can lead us to draw false conclusions

Critical appraisal is an essential step in the process of putting research into practice. Asking questions about an article’s research methodology Scrutinizing its data collection and analysis methods And evaluating how its findings are presented will help you to determine whether that article’s conclusions should influence practical decision-making.

Different research questions require different study designs Different research questions require different study designs. For example the best design for studies evaluating the effectiveness of an intervention or treatment is a Randomized controlled trial.

Studies are also subject to Bias, Confounders and it is important that researchers take steps to minimize this bias &confounders. For example, use of a Control group, Randomization and blinding.

Odds ratios, Risk ratios/Relative risk and number needed to treat etc Odds ratios, Risk ratios/Relative risk and number needed to treat etc., are methods of analysing results in order to determine if an intervention is effective.

Read the abstract Are your issues discussed there? What are the main findings of the research? Do you want to know more after reading the abstract? Does it address a related question? Are there reasons to doubt the findings without reading the whole article?

Read the Introduction and Discussion The introduction and discussion sections will help you to identify the key concepts, goals, subjects, and themes of the research.

Methodology section The Methodology will give you a step-by-step description of exactly how the study was carried out. Where the study was done? From whom the data was collected ? Is it primary or secondary data And how the data was collected?

How good is the data? Does the study adequately control for differences between the groups being compared? Are the statistical methods appropriate? Is the sample large enough to produce significant results?

How good are the measures? Do the measures accurately reflect what the researcher was trying to measure (validity)? How clear and appropriate are these measures? (Too broad? Too narrow? Ambiguous?) Are they actual measures or proxy measures? Are the measures well established in either prior research or through pilot testing by the researcher, or are they ad hoc?

What are the author’s conclusions? Compare the abstract to the Discussion The discussion section is more detailed and precise than the abstract, and will explain the limitations of the research and possible implications which are not mentioned in the abstract.

Compare the raw data given in the tables with the results analyzed in the discussion and conclusions Are the results reported in the conclusions consistent with what is reported in the tables? Is the interpretation consistent with what the actual findings were?

How well are the results related to other research on the same topic? In the discussion or conclusions section, is there a review of how these results compare or contrast with prior research? If this report found something different from previous research, then it’s important to question on appraising the reliability of the findings.

Critical Appraisal of an article on Harm / Risk (Cohort Study) Are the results of the study valid? Primary Guides Was the exposure status clearly defined and measured? How was the outcome of interest measured? What was the follow up time and was it adequate to measure the outcome of interest? Was the outcome measured in the same way for both exposed & not exposed? Secondary Guides How much was the attrition? (Loss to follow up) Are there confounders that the investigator did not address?

3. Will the results help me? 2. What were the results? How strong is the association between exposure and outcome? ( Look for Relative Risk, Hazard ratio) How precise is the estimates of the risk ? (Look for 95% CI and p value for statistical test of significance) 3. Will the results help me? Are the results applicable to my population? What is the magnitude of the risk ? Should I attempt to stop the exposure?

Acknowledgement 1.Dr.B.W.C.Sathyasekaran, Professor,SRMC&RI(DU) Refence: 1. Basic epidemiology R.Beaglehole,R.Bonita,T.Kjellstrom 2 World health organization.Health research methodology:Aguide for training in researh methods 3.Oxford text book of public health 4.Oxman et al User’Guides to Medical literature,JAMA,Nov.1993-vol270.17.2093 5. Guyatt et al User’Guides to Medical literature, JAMA.dec.1993-vol270No.21,2598 6. Levin et al User’Guides to Medical literature,JAMA,May.1994-Vol 271 No.20,1615 7. Handout on workshop on epidemiology at SRMC&RI(2006,2007,2008)

THANK YOU