Appraise the evidence: Difference between revisions
m (Text replace - ''''Lead Editors'''' to ''''Top Contributors''' - {{Special:Contributors/{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}') |
Rachael Lowe (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
'''Original Editor '''- Your name will be added here if you created the original content for this page. | '''Original Editor '''- Your name will be added here if you created the original content for this page. | ||
'''Top Contributors''' - {{Special:Contributors/{{FULLPAGENAME}}}} | '''Top Contributors''' - {{Special:Contributors/{{FULLPAGENAME}}}} | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
== The Appraisal == | == The Appraisal == | ||
| Line 38: | Line 34: | ||
*Are the likely treatment benefits worth the potential harms and costs?<br><br> | *Are the likely treatment benefits worth the potential harms and costs?<br><br> | ||
[http://www.pedro.org.au/scale_item.html The PEDro scale] is a valid measure of the methodological quality of clinical trials. DeMorton (2009) suggests it is valid to sum PEDro scale item scores to obtain a total score that can be treated as interval level measurement and subjected to parametric statistical analysis<ref>de Morton NA (2009). [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;db=PubMed&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;list_uids=19463084&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;dopt=Abstract The PEDro scale is a valid measure of the methodological quality of clinical trials: a demographic study], Australian Journal Physiotherapy, 55(2), 129-133</ref>.<br> | [http://www.pedro.org.au/scale_item.html The PEDro scale] is a valid measure of the methodological quality of clinical trials. DeMorton (2009) suggests it is valid to sum PEDro scale item scores to obtain a total score that can be treated as interval level measurement and subjected to parametric statistical analysis<ref>de Morton NA (2009). [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;db=PubMed&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;list_uids=19463084&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;dopt=Abstract The PEDro scale is a valid measure of the methodological quality of clinical trials: a demographic study], Australian Journal Physiotherapy, 55(2), 129-133</ref>.<br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
== Resources<br> == | == Resources<br> == | ||
[http://www.pedro.org.au/tutorial.html The Pedro Tutorial] is designed to help readers of clinical trials differentiate those trials which are likely to be valid from those that might not be. It also looks briefly at how therapists might use the findings of properly performed studies to make clinical decisions. | [http://www.pedro.org.au/tutorial.html The Pedro Tutorial] is designed to help readers of clinical trials differentiate those trials which are likely to be valid from those that might not be. It also looks briefly at how therapists might use the findings of properly performed studies to make clinical decisions. | ||
Understand simple statistics with our [[Test Diagnostics|Test Diagnostics]] page | |||
<div class="researchbox"> | <div class="researchbox"> | ||
== Recent Related Research (from [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ Pubmed]) == | == Recent Related Research (from [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ Pubmed]) == | ||
Revision as of 07:30, 24 March 2015
Original Editor - Your name will be added here if you created the original content for this page.
Top Contributors - Admin, Rachael Lowe, 127.0.0.1, WikiSysop, Alex Benham, Grace Barla, Angeliki Chorti, Tony Lowe, Evan Thomas and George Prudden
The Appraisal[edit | edit source]
The Centre for Health Evidence [1]suggests the following questions to appraise the literature:
Are the results of the study valid?[edit | edit source]
Primary Guides:
- Was the assignment of patients to treatments randomized?
- Were all patients who entered the trial properly accounted for and attributed at its conclusion?
- Was follow up complete?
- Were patients analyzed in the groups to which they were randomized?
Secondary Guides:
- Were patients, health workers, and study personnel "blind" to treatment?
- Were the groups similar at the start of the trial?
- Aside from the experimental intervention, were the groups treated equally?
What were the results?
[edit | edit source]
- How large was the treatment effect?
- How precise was the estimate of the treatment effect?
Will the results help me in caring for my patients?
[edit | edit source]
- Can the results be applied to my patient care?
- Were all clinically important outcomes considered?
- Are the likely treatment benefits worth the potential harms and costs?
The PEDro scale is a valid measure of the methodological quality of clinical trials. DeMorton (2009) suggests it is valid to sum PEDro scale item scores to obtain a total score that can be treated as interval level measurement and subjected to parametric statistical analysis[2].
Resources
[edit | edit source]
The Pedro Tutorial is designed to help readers of clinical trials differentiate those trials which are likely to be valid from those that might not be. It also looks briefly at how therapists might use the findings of properly performed studies to make clinical decisions.
Understand simple statistics with our Test Diagnostics page
Recent Related Research (from Pubmed)[edit | edit source]
Extension:RSS -- Error: Not a valid URL: Feed goes here!!|charset=UTF-8|short|max=10
References[edit | edit source]
References will automatically be added here, see adding references tutorial.
- ↑ Gordon H. Guyatt, David Sackett, Deborah J. Cook, (2005). How to Use an Article About Therapy or Prevention, available from The Centre for Health Evidence, www.cche.net/usersguides/therapy.asp#I1 [last accessed 27/5/9].
- ↑ de Morton NA (2009). The PEDro scale is a valid measure of the methodological quality of clinical trials: a demographic study, Australian Journal Physiotherapy, 55(2), 129-133
