Critical appraisal (or quality assessment) in evidence based medicine, is the use of explicit, transparent methods to assess the data in published research, applying the rules of evidence to factors such as internal validity, adherence to reporting standards, conclusions, generalizability and risk-of-bias.[1][2] Critical appraisal methods form a central part of the systematic review process.[3] They are used in evidence synthesis to assist clinical decision-making, and are increasingly used in evidence-based social care and education provision.

Critical appraisal checklists help to appraise the quality of the study design and (for quantitative studies) the risk of bias. Critical appraisal tools for cross-sectional studies are the AXIS,[4] JBI,[5] Nested Knowledge[6] tools; for randomised controlled trials are Nested Knowledge,[6] Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool,[7][8] JBI tool[5] and CASP tools.[9] Additionally, supplementary critical appraisal tools such as Naicker's Critically Appraising for Antiracism Tool[10] and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Quality Appraisal Tool[11] may be used in conjunction with tools for specific study designs to assess additional biases or ethics practices. Critical appraisal may also be an integral part of formalized approaches to turn evidence into recommendations for practice such as GRADE.

See also

References

  1. ^ Earl-Slater A (2002). The Handbook of Clinical Trials and Other Research. Radcliffe Publishing Ltd. ISBN 978-1-85775-485-8.
  2. ^ Porta M, Last JM (2008). Dictionary of Epidemiology (5 ed.). OUP USA. ISBN 978-0-19-531450-2.
  3. ^ Higgins JP, Green S, eds. (September 2008). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.1. The Cochrane Collaboration.
  4. ^ Downes MJ, Brennan ML, Williams HC, Dean RS (December 2016). "Development of a critical appraisal tool to assess the quality of cross-sectional studies (AXIS)". BMJ Open. 6 (12): e011458. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011458. PMC 5168618. PMID 27932337.
  5. ^ a b "Critical Appraisal Tools". Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). Archived from the original on 1 April 2020. Retrieved 2019-02-24.
  6. ^ a b Cowie K, Rahmatullah A, Hardy N, Holub K, Kallmes K (2022). "Web-Based Software Tools for Systematic Literature Review in Medicine: Systematic Search and Feature Analysis". JMIR. 10 (5): e33219. doi:10.2196/33219. PMC 9112080. PMID 35499859.
  7. ^ Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Jüni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, et al. (October 2011). "The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials". BMJ. 343: d5928. doi:10.1136/bmj.d5928. PMC 3196245. PMID 22008217.
  8. ^ Sterne JA, Savović J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Blencowe NS, Boutron I, et al. (August 2019). "RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials". BMJ. 366: l4898. doi:10.1136/bmj.l4898. hdl:1983/9d6c8b02-8c54-437e-929f-f27b0d4f655b. PMID 31462531.
  9. ^ "CASP Checklists". Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP). Retrieved 2019-02-24.
  10. ^ Naicker R (2022-12-19). "Critically appraising for antiracism". Education for Information. 38 (4): 291–308. doi:10.3233/EFI-220052. S2CID 253128079.
  11. ^ Harfield S, Pearson O, Morey K, Kite E, Canuto K, Glover K, et al. (April 2020). "Assessing the quality of health research from an Indigenous perspective: the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander quality appraisal tool". BMC Medical Research Methodology. 20 (1): 79. doi:10.1186/s12874-020-00959-3. PMC 7147059. PMID 32276606.

External links

Categories