CRITICAL EVALUATION OF BIOMEDICAL LITERATURE

Similar documents
Experimental Psychology

HOW STATISTICS IMPACT PHARMACY PRACTICE?

Chapter 8. Learning Objectives 9/10/2012. Research Principles and Evidence Based Practice

Clinical Research Scientific Writing. K. A. Koram NMIMR

Critical Appraisal of Scientific Literature. André Valdez, PhD Stanford Health Care Stanford University School of Medicine

The Research Roadmap Checklist

About Reading Scientific Studies

Inferences: What inferences about the hypotheses and questions can be made based on the results?

Student Performance Q&A:

Chapter 02. Basic Research Methodology

Guidelines for Writing and Reviewing an Informed Consent Manuscript From the Editors of Clinical Research in Practice: The Journal of Team Hippocrates

AMSc Research Methods Research approach IV: Experimental [2]

STATISTICS AND RESEARCH DESIGN

POST GRADUATE DIPLOMA IN BIOETHICS (PGDBE) Term-End Examination June, 2016 MHS-014 : RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Overview of Study Designs in Clinical Research

Evidence Based Medicine

Basic Steps in Planning Research. Dr. P.J. Brink and Dr. M.J. Wood

Write a research proposal to rationalize the purpose of the research. (Consult PowerPoint slide show notes.)

INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ON ASSURANCE ENGAGEMENTS 3000 ASSURANCE ENGAGEMENTS OTHER THAN AUDITS OR REVIEWS OF HISTORICAL FINANCIAL INFORMATION CONTENTS

GLOSSARY OF GENERAL TERMS

Table of Contents. Plots. Essential Statistics for Nursing Research 1/12/2017

Evidence-based practice tutorial Critical Appraisal Skills

How to Write a Case Report

CHECKLIST FOR EVALUATING A RESEARCH REPORT Provided by Dr. Blevins

Journal of Biostatistics and Epidemiology

WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT 1 (8%)

AOTA S EVIDENCE EXCHANGE CRITICALLY APPRAISED PAPER (CAP) GUIDELINES Annual AOTA Conference Poster Submissions Critically Appraised Papers (CAPs) are

Tips For Writing Referee Reports. Lance Cooper

Overview. Goals of Interpretation. Methodology. Reasons to Read and Evaluate

LOYOLA COLLEGE (AUTONOMOUS), CHENNAI

The Logic of Data Analysis Using Statistical Techniques M. E. Swisher, 2016

Hypothesis Testing. Richard S. Balkin, Ph.D., LPC-S, NCC

Tips for Writing a Research Paper in APA format:

EFFECTIVE MEDICAL WRITING Michelle Biros, MS, MD Editor-in -Chief Academic Emergency Medicine

Assurance Engagements Other than Audits or Review of Historical Financial Statements

The knowledge and skills involved in clinical audit

The Writing Center. Message. Organization. Style & Mechanics. Format. Citations. Appointments online:

Publishing Your Study: Tips for Young Investigators. Learning Objectives 7/9/2013. Eric B. Bass, MD, MPH

Leaning objectives. Outline. 13-Jun-16 BASIC EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS

Appraising the Literature Overview of Study Designs

A Brief Guide to Writing

Controlled Trials. Spyros Kitsiou, PhD

Competency Rubric Bank for the Sciences (CRBS)

Relationships Between the High Impact Indicators and Other Indicators

Variables Research involves trying to determine the relationship between two or more variables.

Scientific Abstract Writing

CRITICAL APPRAISAL AP DR JEMAIMA CHE HAMZAH MD (UKM) MS (OFTAL) UKM PHD (UK) DEPARTMENT OF OPHTHALMOLOGY UKM MEDICAL CENTRE

THE SCIENTIFIC WORLD VIEW

CONSORT 2010 checklist of information to include when reporting a randomised trial*

Thursday, April 25, 13. Intervention Studies

The Cochrane Collaboration

Research Methodology. Characteristics of Observations. Variables 10/18/2016. Week Most important know what is being observed.

UNIT 4 ALGEBRA II TEMPLATE CREATED BY REGION 1 ESA UNIT 4

Learning Objectives 9/9/2013. Hypothesis Testing. Conflicts of Interest. Descriptive statistics: Numerical methods Measures of Central Tendency

In this second module, we will focus on features that distinguish quantitative and qualitative research projects.

Psychology Research Process

Author's response to reviews

Standards for the reporting of new Cochrane Intervention Reviews

Research Design. Source: John W. Creswell RESEARCH DESIGN. Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches Third Edition

Statistics: A Brief Overview Part I. Katherine Shaver, M.S. Biostatistician Carilion Clinic

Cambridge Pre-U 9773 Psychology June 2013 Principal Examiner Report for Teachers

Critiquing Research and Developing Foundations for Your Life Care Plan. Starting Your Search

Thursday, April 25, 13. Intervention Studies

CHAPTER 3 DATA ANALYSIS: DESCRIBING DATA

Reviewing Papers and Writing Referee Reports. (B. DeMarco, Lance Cooper, Tony Liss, Doug Beck) Why referees are needed

TITLE. Author name Author address (school address) INTRODUCTION

Chapter 2. Behavioral Variability and Research

Critical Thinking Assessment at MCC. How are we doing?

Conflict of interest in randomised controlled surgical trials: Systematic review, qualitative and quantitative analysis

Describe what is meant by a placebo Contrast the double-blind procedure with the single-blind procedure Review the structure for organizing a memo

Investigative Biology (Advanced Higher)

1. Draft checklist for judging on quality of animal studies (Van der Worp et al., 2010)

Confidence Intervals On Subsets May Be Misleading

I. Identifying the question Define Research Hypothesis and Questions

Designing Psychology Experiments: Data Analysis and Presentation

Critical Appraisal Series

Evidence-Based Medicine Journal Club. A Primer in Statistics, Study Design, and Epidemiology. August, 2013

Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Methodological Guidelines

Recent developments for combining evidence within evidence streams: bias-adjusted meta-analysis

04/12/2014. Research Methods in Psychology. Chapter 6: Independent Groups Designs. What is your ideas? Testing

SUMMER 2011 RE-EXAM PSYF11STAT - STATISTIK

What you should know before you collect data. BAE 815 (Fall 2017) Dr. Zifei Liu

9.0 L '- ---'- ---'- --' X

Understandable Statistics

CHAPTER - 6 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS. This chapter discusses inferential statistics, which use sample data to

Table 2. Mapping graduate curriculum to Graduate Level Expectations (GDLEs) - MSc (RHBS) program

Critical review (Newsletter for Center for Qualitative Methodology) concerning:

RESEARCH METHODS. A Process of Inquiry. tm HarperCollinsPublishers ANTHONY M. GRAZIANO MICHAEL L RAULIN

Figure: Presentation slides:

AOTA S EVIDENCE EXCHANGE GUIDELINES TO CRITICALLY APPRAISED PAPER (CAP) WORKSHEET

CLINICAL EVIDENCE MADE EASY

Lessons in biostatistics

Chapter-2 RESEARCH DESIGN

Revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2.0) Additional considerations for cross-over trials

Principles of publishing

Basic Biostatistics. Chapter 1. Content

PRINCIPLES OF STATISTICS

Chapter 5: Field experimental designs in agriculture

Still important ideas

Neuroscience and Generalized Empirical Method Go Three Rounds

Transcription:

Chapter 9 CRITICAL EVALUATION OF BIOMEDICAL LITERATURE M.G.Rajanandh, Department of Pharmacy Practice, SRM College of Pharmacy, SRM University.

INTRODUCTION Reviewing the Biomedical Literature poses a great challenge to the clinical professionals. evaluating a scientific article is a complex task. Knowledge of the standard anatomy of an article and idiosyncrasy of various types of studies will assist the reader to review the Biomedical Literature efficiently.

Biomedical research It is the basic research, applied research or translational researches conducted to aid and support the body of knowledge in the field of Clinical Practice. Literature evaluation It is the process of reading and evaluating article, journal, literature, and scientific study in a systematic way to reach at a conclusion that one can interpret itself whether the study results are scientifically proved and applicable to Clinical Practice. Scientific Study It is a written and published report that describes original research results. Scientific studies are written in a style that is exceedingly clear and concise. A well-written scientific literature explains the author's interest. Author should summarize and give an idea on previous research, and Reader should be able to distinguish between previous research and the actual current study

Critical Appraisal It is the process of systematically examining research evidence to assess its validity, results, and relevance. Critical Appraisal is a way to assess the scientific value and trustworthiness of a study published in a research article. It helps people in developing necessary skills to make true judgments of a scientific literature

Selecting the Article Primary step in evaluation of a literature is to select an article which has a greater impact in clinical practice. Initially, read the title, authors and abstract. The title should be comprehensive that the reader can efficiently analyze the article s potential and its importance in current clinical practice. If not, reader can reject it and move on to the next article.

Reading the Literature Reviewing begins with reading and understanding the abstract or short summary that gives a brief background about the research. Initial reading gives the concept of objectives, methodology, results and proposed significance of the study. A proper understanding of research study s nature is must for a reader.

Biomedical Literature includes critical appraisal of the following contents: Title Title describes the breadth and depth of the current study and indicates the methodology used. It is the limited possible words that adequately describe contents of the study. The title of an article should be brief, definite and concise and should catch the attention of the readers interested in the study

Evaluation of Title 1) Based on the title itself reader cannot review or discard the study. 2) Title should not contain abbreviations, proprietary names, chemical formulae, and jargons. The title should inform the real subject of the article. 3) Title should not reflect its content. First impression is the best impression; the title should be specific and studied well. 4) Title should not indicate author s preference for any specific subject

Abstract an abbreviated accurate representing the contents of a document, mainly prepared by its author(s) for publication in it. abstract can be defined as a summary of the information in a document. A synopsis (not more than 250 words) should be mentioned before introduction in the article. Evaluation of Abstract Abstract should outline a brief summary of each section; Introduction, objectives, scope of investigation, materials and brief methodology, results, and conclusion which indicates study findings. Abstract does not provide complete information about the study and should not be used alone to evaluate the study

Introduction It serves two purposes in the study, creating readers interest in subject and providing them with enough information to understand the study. Evaluation of Introduction Introduction should be presented, with all possible clarity, the nature and scope of the problem investigated. It should provide pertinent literature to orient the reader. It should explain the reason why the current research is needed?

Objective Objective of a study is what the author is trying to achieve. It is a specific, clear and succinct statement of intended outcomes from research. Objective should be stated in a clear and concise manner. Evaluation of Objective 1. Establishing new health programs 2. Implementing new policies 3. Trying to settle a controversy 4. Showing the validity of a new technique 5. Opening up a new field of inquiry.

Materials and Methods Methodology is one of the most important sections of a study. Its purpose is to describe the methods used in the experiment and materials by which the experiment was carried out. The description of this section should be detailed enough to allow other researchers to replicate the work. Evaluation of Study Methods Methods used, and their description should be elucidated. What are the dose regimens, route and frequency of administration, the overall length of the study to be mentioned. What was the length of wash-out period

Study Designs The first part of this section is generally an overview of the type of study design that is utilized in doing research. A sound study design supports study conclusion and result. Study design should be clear and provide enough details so that potential reader can repeat the research

Various types of Study design Observational studies Data collected from one or more group of subjects, Observational studies may be prospective or retrospective. Single blind Either subjects or investigators are unaware of treatment allocation. Double blind Neither subjects nor investigators are aware of treatment allocation. Triple blind Subjects and investigators are unaware of treatment allocation; another group involved with interpretation of data is also unaware of treatment allocation. Parallel study All subjects receive only one treatment.

Prospective Data is collected forward in time from the start of the study. Retrospective Historical data (i.e., data referring to past events) is collected. Cohort studies Cohort studies consist of prospective observation of one or more groups with certain characteristics. Randomized control trial Subjects are randomly allocated to either an intervention group or control group. Randomized controlled trials are described as the gold standard in clinical research.

Evaluation of Study Designs The study design selected by an investigator should be sound and likely to answer the research questions. Author(s) must describe study population well enough so that the reader is able to visualize the sample population precisely under investigation.

Bias It is a systemic variation in which treatment groups under study are treated or measured differently on a consistent basis. Bias can mislead one to get into an erroneous outcome. The reader should be able to find out the source of bias and its influence on the final outcome of study

Types of bias Missing clinical data bias Certain clinical data may be missing because they were normal, negative or never measured. Withdrawal bias Patients who withdraw from a study may differ from those who remain. Sample size bias Too small Samples are insignificant; samples which are too large are proved to be helpful. Instrument bias Defects in the calibration or maintenance of instruments may lead to systematic deviations in results.

Statistics Knowledge of Statistics can help an individual to evaluate whether the statistical tests used in a study are appropriate or not. Different types of data (or variables) are encountered in statistics. Errors in statistical analysis of data lead to invalid result/conclusion

TYPES OF DATA TWO COMPARISION GROUPS MORE THAN TWO COMPARISION GROUPS UNPAIRED DATA PAIRED DATA UNPAIRED DATA Nominal Chi square McNemar Chi square Ordinal Mann-Witney U test Wilcoxon Kruskal-Wallis Parametric Student t-test Paired student test Analysis-of variance (ANOVA)

Evaluation of Statistics Readers should determine whether appropriate statistical methods were used for data analysis. Use of inappropriate methods will results in misleading conclusion. Method section of any scientific literature should include a summary description of the statistical tests that were used to evaluate data. Qualitative and quantitative data are examined differently.

Study Results and Analysis Results should be described and presented in figures, tables, and charts, as they are the heart of the scientific literature. Figures, tables, and charts will assist the reader in deciding whether it is worth to read the rest of the article or to discard it. A properly conducted study should present data on subjects involved in the study. All the data collected in the method section should also be presented

Evaluation of Study Results and Analysis reader should have a proper understanding of study and should evaluate clinical and statistical reliability of the study Sometimes authors try to present results in a confusing way, which most likely reflects hap hazardous data collection and lack of clearly defined study objectives. Are the negative results been quoted? In case of any negative results those should be quoted and the limitations have to be specified.

Discussion and Conclusion Discussion Section of a study provides an opportunity for the author to interpret results and explain their clinical importance by relating or comparing with previous work or practice. Conclusion is the author s generated inferences, opinions and hypotheses about results. This section should contain views that the author draws from data obtained by the study

Evaluation of Discussion and Conclusion Is the conclusion over-generalized? The Conclusion must be clear and understandable to the reader. Conclusion must be consistent with study objectives and justified by results. Conclusion should not be a matter of dispute. How does the research fit into the context of its conclusion? It should give the answer of the study objective for which claim was made prior to study. Readers must understand the relationship between the data and the conclusions.

References While writing article, authors always refer to some information from other sources. All these sources are listed in Reference Section, sometimes referred to as Bibliography. Evaluation of References 1) Are the references given? Whether appropriate and adequate references are used in the study? 2) Are the references quoted appropriately in the research article? 3) Are the references given recent and important? 4) What is the size of Reference Section? 5) How the references are used for support, rebuttal etc.? 6) Do the references match citations in the text? 7) Authors should avoid citing their own research efforts and publication.