Memory Joggers: Evaluating the Usefulness of Review Articles
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:
A. Is the article proposing to answer a specific clinical question or questions? Did the authors study an outcome that patients would care about?
Yes (go on) No (Stop)
B. Is the problem studied one that is common to your practice and the intervention feasible?
Yes (go on) No (Stop)
C. Will this information, if true, require you to change your current practice?
Yes (go on) No (Stop)
DETERMINE VALIDITY
If the answers to all three questions above are Yes, then continued assessment of the article is mandatory.
D. Finding the studies
- Were the methods used to locate relevant studies comprhensive and clearly stated
Yes No (Stop)
- Did they clearly outline study inclusion criteria that generalize to my practice?
Yes No (Stop)
- Was the study selection independently performed by at least two investigators?
Yes No
E. Validity: Did t he authors perform an "official" validity assessment of the studies using appropriate criteria?
Yes No (Stop)
- Was the assessment independently performed by at least two investigators?
Yes No
- Were the included studies reasonably valid?
Yes No
If not, how did the authors handle this (a priori exclusion or sub-analysis based on study quality)? What effect might the lack of validity have on the results?
_____________________________
_____________________________
_____________________________
F. Analyzing the Data: Is it reasonable to combine these studies?
- Were the included studies statistically homogenous?
Yes No
If not, how was this addressed (reasonable explanation, random effects model)?
_____________________________
_____________________________
_____________________________
- Were the populations, interventions, outcomes, and outcome measurements combined in a way that makes intuitive sense?
Yes No
- Could publication bias have occurred?
Yes No
G. Interpreting the results: were they meaningful?
- Were the results statistically different?
Yes No
- If so, were they clinically significant?
Yes No
- If not, was the power adequate to find a difference?
Yes No
- What will you do with the results?
_____________________________
_____________________________
_____________________________
Revision 2001: Information Mastery Working Group. Adapted from material developed at McMaster University. |
|
