Sample Journal Club Your Name Here

Paper Catheters into Clots for Strokes, Authors et al, 2015 Type of paper: Treatment Trial (or diagnostic test trial, meta-analysis, etc)

Author’s Hypotheses At the study conclusion, what did the authors hope to prove Statement of purpose for the study: Within patients with some disease, is this treatment superior to something else in regards to an outcome we care about.

Background Why has this question remained unsettled or controversial Keep it brief, 1-2 slides Does not have to be exhaustive, just summarize major developments

Patients Inclusion Criteria Exclusion Criteria

Discussion Are these criteria reasonable in reference to the underlying hypothesis?

Study design Randomized? Placebo controlled Blinded Parallel arm Cross-over Change from baseline Mean differences between arms Meta-analysis Etc.

Discussion Slide What are the advantages and disadvantages of the chosen design for answering the hypothesis? Would you choose anything different?

Intervention What is the intervention? What is the comparator? Any additional considerations for blinding?

Preplanned Outcomes Primary Secondary Tertiary

Discussion Are these outcomes relevant and clinically significant?

Were Patients Similar at the Start of the Trial: Patients were randomized: Yes/No Analysis according to randomization: Yes/No Treatment groups similar: Yes/No Table 1 Reasonable?

Did patients stay similar throughout the trial? Participants were blinded to group allocation: Yes/No Clinicians were blinded to group allocation: Yes/No Outcome assessors were blinded to group allocation: Yes/No Follow-up was/was not complete: Yes/No CONSORT Diagram

Analyses What statistical methods were used? How did the authors determine power and sample size? Intention to treat Were discontinuations followed until study end

Discussion Are these analyses appropriate for the hypothesis What are the alternative ways to analyze Was the trial powered to be definitive

Results: How large and precise were the treatment effects: Present confidence intervals RRR/ARR/NNT: Primary Outcomes Secondary Outcomes Other Outcomes Were the outcomes kept consistent with a priori hypotheses

Adverse Events

Discussion: Clinical Relevance for Us The patients were similar to our patients: Yes/No Outcome was clinically relevant: Yes/No Benefits of the trial are worth the harms/costs: Yes/No

Subset Analyses Results What are the take away points?

What did the author’s conclude

Recapitulate the hypotheses Did the authors answer their hypothesis

What do you conclude? Endovascular therapies + tPA are good

Summarize and Discuss Limitations Consider presenting in PICO format (patients, intervention, comparison, and outcome)

Discussion Other thoughts on how to apply or study further Would you accept the manuscript if reviewing?