Memory Joggers: Worksheet for Articles about about Prognosis
1. Determine Relevance:
Is this article worth taking the time to read? If the answer to any of these questions is No, it may be better to read other articles first.
Based on the conclusion of the abstract or article:
- A. Will this information, if true, have a direct bearing on the health of your patients and is it something they will care about?
Yes (Go on) No (stop)
- B. Is the problem addressed by the diagnostic test one that is common to your practice and is the test available to you
Yes (Go on) No (stop)
- C. Will this information, if true, require you to change your current practice?
Yes (Go on) No (stop)
2. Determine Validity:
If the answers to all three questions above are Yes, then continued assessment of the article is mandatory. Study design flaws are common; fatal flaws are arresting.
-
- D. Was an "inception cohort" assembled? (Did the investigators identify a specific group of people and follow them forward in time?)
Yes No (stop)
- E. Were the criteria for entry into the study objective and reasonable?
Yes No (stop)
- F. Was follow-up of subjects adequate (at least 70%-80%)?
Yes No (stop)
- G. Were the patients similar to yours, in terms of age, sex, race, severity of disease, and other factors that might influence the course of disease?
Yes No (stop)
- H. Where did the subjects come from - was the referral pattern specified?
Yes No (
- I. Were outcomes assessed objectively and blindly?
Yes No
Revision 1994: Information Mastery Working Group.
Adapted from material developed at McMaster University
|
