Critically Appraised Topics: Difference between revisions
Rachael Lowe (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Rachael Lowe (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== What is a Critically Appraised Topic (CAT)<br> == | == What is a Critically Appraised Topic (CAT)<br> == | ||
A critically appraised topic (or CAT) is a short summary of evidence on a topic of interest, usually focussed around a clinical question. Defined as a brief “summary of a search and critical appraisal of the literature related to a focused clinical question, which should be kept in an easily accessible place so that it can be used to help make clinical decisions”<ref>Centre for Evidence Based Emergency Medicine, [http://www.ebem.org/definitions.html#Critically%20appraised%20topic http://www.ebem.org/definitions.html#Critically%20appraised%20topic] last accessed 21st March 2011</ref>. <br> | A critically appraised topic (or CAT) is a short summary of evidence on a topic of interest, usually focussed around a clinical question. Defined as a brief “summary of a search and critical appraisal of the literature related to a focused clinical question, which should be kept in an easily accessible place so that it can be used to help make clinical decisions”<ref>Centre for Evidence Based Emergency Medicine, [http://www.ebem.org/definitions.html#Critically%20appraised%20topic http://www.ebem.org/definitions.html#Critically%20appraised%20topic] last accessed 21st March 2011</ref>. <br> | ||
A CAT is like a shorter and less rigorous version of a systematic review, summarising the best available research evidence on a topic. Usually more than one study is included in a CAT. When professionals summarise a single study, the outcome is a critically appraised paper (or CAP). CATs and CAPs are one way for busy clinicians to collate and share their appraisals. | A CAT is like a shorter and less rigorous version of a systematic review, summarising the best available research evidence on a topic. Usually more than one study is included in a CAT. When professionals summarise a single study, the outcome is a critically appraised paper (or CAP). CATs and CAPs are one way for busy clinicians to collate and share their appraisals. | ||
Key parts of a CAT include:<br> | |||
#Purpose<br> | |||
#Reviewer<br> | |||
#Date of completion<br> | |||
#Well-built questions<br> | |||
#Search strategies and results<br> | |||
#Evidence retrieved<br> | |||
#Appraisal<br> | |||
#Conclusions<br> | |||
== Why do we need CATs<br> == | == Why do we need CATs<br> == | ||
It is almost impossible for practitioners to keep up to date with all the new evidence for their field of clinical expertise. Research shows that even seasoned health-care clinicians and practitioners encounter up to 5 “knowledge needs” for every in-patient, and about 2 “needs” for every three out-patients (Sauvé, 1995). “Knowledge needs” raise questions about the best course of action. Evidence-based decision making in clinical scenarios demands time-efficient, up-to-date evidence review. Critically appraised summaries of the best evidence for common clinical or educational questions address these needs. “Gold standard” would be a systematic review, but this takes too much time and effort and is not practicable for clinicians (Ziegler et al., 2001). <br> | It is almost impossible for practitioners to keep up to date with all the new evidence for their field of clinical expertise. Research shows that even seasoned health-care clinicians and practitioners encounter up to 5 “knowledge needs” for every in-patient, and about 2 “needs” for every three out-patients (Sauvé, 1995). “Knowledge needs” raise questions about the best course of action. Evidence-based decision making in clinical scenarios demands time-efficient, up-to-date evidence review. Critically appraised summaries of the best evidence for common clinical or educational questions address these needs. “Gold standard” would be a systematic review, but this takes too much time and effort and is not practicable for clinicians (Ziegler et al., 2001). <br> | ||
== CATs as part of the EBP process == | |||
1. Developing a well-built question<br>2. Search for and select best evidence<br>3. Analyse the evidence - '''Write CAT'''<br>4. Apply the evidence to the clinical situation<br>5. Evaluating the application of the evidence - '''Revise CAT'''<br>6. Disseminating the findings - '''Share CAT'''<br> |
Revision as of 18:44, 16 March 2011
What is a Critically Appraised Topic (CAT)
[edit | edit source]
A critically appraised topic (or CAT) is a short summary of evidence on a topic of interest, usually focussed around a clinical question. Defined as a brief “summary of a search and critical appraisal of the literature related to a focused clinical question, which should be kept in an easily accessible place so that it can be used to help make clinical decisions”[1].
A CAT is like a shorter and less rigorous version of a systematic review, summarising the best available research evidence on a topic. Usually more than one study is included in a CAT. When professionals summarise a single study, the outcome is a critically appraised paper (or CAP). CATs and CAPs are one way for busy clinicians to collate and share their appraisals.
Key parts of a CAT include:
- Purpose
- Reviewer
- Date of completion
- Well-built questions
- Search strategies and results
- Evidence retrieved
- Appraisal
- Conclusions
Why do we need CATs
[edit | edit source]
It is almost impossible for practitioners to keep up to date with all the new evidence for their field of clinical expertise. Research shows that even seasoned health-care clinicians and practitioners encounter up to 5 “knowledge needs” for every in-patient, and about 2 “needs” for every three out-patients (Sauvé, 1995). “Knowledge needs” raise questions about the best course of action. Evidence-based decision making in clinical scenarios demands time-efficient, up-to-date evidence review. Critically appraised summaries of the best evidence for common clinical or educational questions address these needs. “Gold standard” would be a systematic review, but this takes too much time and effort and is not practicable for clinicians (Ziegler et al., 2001).
CATs as part of the EBP process[edit | edit source]
1. Developing a well-built question
2. Search for and select best evidence
3. Analyse the evidence - Write CAT
4. Apply the evidence to the clinical situation
5. Evaluating the application of the evidence - Revise CAT
6. Disseminating the findings - Share CAT
- ↑ Centre for Evidence Based Emergency Medicine, http://www.ebem.org/definitions.html#Critically%20appraised%20topic last accessed 21st March 2011