Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Contents Authorship
Appraising journal articles Are the authors based at a well-established
Appraising other types of literature Centre of Excellence?
Appraising websites Are there any issues of sponsorship or
competing interests?
Appraising journal articles
The best way to find high quality information
is to carry out a literature search on one or Journal ranking and impact factors
more databases and to download, copy or Although the impact factor of a journal is
request relevant current publications. Once clearly going to be linked to its popularity and
you have obtained the papers most relevant accessibility, the journals with higher impact
to your question you should consider a factors in a subject area are generally well-
number of things before using the results. respected for good reason.
This applies even when the publications are
from peer reviewed journals: Abstract quality
Read the paper carefully and don’t rely on the
Publication bias abstract alone. Around 24%-60% of
Authorship abstracts in peer reviewed journals have
Journal ranking and impact factors
deficiencies. Three common types of
Abstract quality
inaccuracies are: 1) data inconsistent in
Publication bias abstract and body of the paper, tables, and
figures; 2) data or information in the abstract
1. Negative results don’t (often) get
do not appear elsewhere; and 3) conclusions
published – If you want to carry out a detailed
in the abstract not substantiated in the paper
or systematic review of a subject area, you
itself.
might consider trying to get hold of
[see Ward LG et al. Annals of
unpublished studies.
Pharmacotherapy 2004; 38(7-8): 1173-7].
2. Reviewers may be biased against
unconventional versus conventional Critical appraisal of an individual
techniques (eg orthodox drug versus journal article describing a piece of
alternative therapy). research
A number of check-lists are available to
assist you with the critical appraisal of a
journal article describing a piece of research.
The questions vary for different types of
research study but all boil down to four main Content
issues: Source
What is this paper about? Structure
Do I trust it?
What did they find?
Is it relevant to me? Content
Consider: intended audience, purpose of site,
accuracy – are the sources of information
Critical appraisal checklists are
provided?
available from:
CASP(Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) Source
http://www.casp-uk.net/
Consider: author(s), currency – is it up to
Centre for Health Evidence
date?, depth/breadth of coverage, bias – are
http://www.cche.net/
there any ‘conflicts of interest’ through
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination
sponsorship for example?
http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/
Health Evidence Bulletins Wales Structure
http://hebw.cf.ac.uk/projectmethod/index.htm
Consider: graphics, presentation, ease of
National Institute for Health and Clinical
use.
Excellence
http://www.nice.org.uk
Books and other publications of relevance to
evidence-based practice and clinical
and cover:
governance, including statistics, can be found
Systematic reviews in the 362.1072 section of the Cochrane
Randomised controlled trials building’s Health library. We recommend:
Trials without randomisation Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper. 4th ed.
Cohort (longitudinal) studies Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell,2010
Case-control studies Sackett D, Straus SE, Richardson WS et al.
Cross-sectional studies Evidence-based medicine. 2nd ed, Edinburgh:
Qualitative research Churchill Livingstone,2000
Cost-effectiveness studies Wilson P. How to find the good and avoid the
bad or ugly. A short guide to tools for rating
Other examples are provided at:
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/insrv/libraries/sure/sy quality of health information on the internet.
snet/criticalappraisalchecklist.html BMJ 2002; 324: 598-602.