CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE Dr.S.Chakravarty MD

TYPES OF SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE

What is Original research ? An article is considered original research if... it is the report of a study written by the researchers who actually did the study the researchers describe their hypothesis or research question and the purpose of the study the researchers detail their research methods the results of the research are reported the researchers interpret their results and discuss possible implications  

However, the main Problem here is that Fewer than 15% of all articles published on a particular topic are useful for clinical practice. This happens more often if they are published in Throwaways Journal supplements Sponsorship(from pharmaceutical companies etc)

CONFLICT OF INTEREST A conflict of interest (COI) occurs when an individual or organization is involved in multiple interests, one of which could possibly corrupt the motivation for an act in another. For example, a pharmaceutical company may only show 1% drug trials which show the benefits of a drugs and leave out the other 99% that show ineffectiveness or possible harm.

The big Question: - What do we do ? How do we know? Answer :- CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE

Critical analysis of Scientific Literature Assessment of evidence by systematically reviewing its relevance, validity and results to specific situations. Chambers, R (1998)   Balanced assessment of strength of research against its weaknesses Assessment of research process and results Consideration of qualitative and quantitative aspects of research To be undertaken by all health professionals as part of their work

Criteria for evaluating an original research article Step one: conduct an initial validity and relevance screen

Step 2: Determine the intent of the article Therapy Diagnosis & screening Causation Prognosis

Step 3: Determine the validity of the article based on its intent READ AND ANALYZE THE VARIOUS SECTIONS OF A RESEARCH PAPER CAREFULLY   Evaluating various parts of a paper

Title Does the title describe the study clearly? Do the key words in the title express the key concepts of the study? Is the title clear and concise? Does the title entice you to read further?

Abstract • Does the abstract briefly state the purpose, method, results, conclusion, and clinical relevance of the study? • As you read the abstract, did you learn the essence of the article without the details? • Does the abstract provide enough information to enable you to determine whether you want to read the entire article?

Introduction   Does the author clearly identify the research problem or question? Is the problem significant enough to warrant a study? Do the authors use theory to provide a framework to support the study and to guide the analysis? Does the review of the literature seem complete, current, and appropriate? Are the purposes of the study clearly explained? Is there a clearly stated research question or hypothesis?

Methods • Is the sample clearly described, in terms of size, relevant characteristics, etc.? • Was the sample appropriately selected? • In the case of an experimental design, was an appropriate control group used? • Are the materials used in conducting the study or collecting data clearly described? • Are the scientific procedures thoroughly described and presented in chronological order? • Could someone replicate the study from the information provided?

Results Is the results section clearly written and well organized? • Are the data summarized? • Are the important results connected directly to the hypothesis? • Are results statistically significant?

Discussion If there was a hypothesis, was it accepted or rejected? • Are the findings discussed in terms of the conceptual framework, research problem, and/or hypothesis? • Is further literature cited to address the findings? • Are the limitations of the study delineated? • Are suggestions for further research appropriate and are they clearly stated?

Conclusion • Are the results briefly restated? • Do the conclusions follow from the results?  

References • Is the reference list sufficiently current? • Do the works cited reflect the breadth of existing literature on the topic of the study? For example, does the works cited list compare favorably with the works cited for articles written on similar topics? • Are citations used appropriately in the text?

General Impressions Is the article well written and organized? • Does the study address an important problem? • What are the most important things you learned from this study? • What do you see as the most compelling strengths of the study? • How might this study be improved? Readability and ease of understanding

All the best !