HOW TO CRITICALLY APPRAISE A RESEARCH PAPER?

Authors

  • Professor Ishtiaq Ahmed Department Of Surgery, Al-Nafees Medical College And Hospital, Lehtrar Road, Farash Town, Islamabad

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v9.i3.2021.3779

Keywords:

Critical Appraisal, Research Paper, Evidence Based Practice, Research Methodology, Study Validity, Study Reliability

Abstract [English]

Background: Critical appraisal of research paper is a fundamental skill in modern medical practice, which is skills-set and developed throughout the professional career. The professional experience facilitates this and through integration with clinical experience and patient preference, permits high quality evidence-based medicine practice in patient care. These skills to be mastered not only by academic medical professionals but also by the clinicians involved in clinical practice.


Objective: To provide a simple and robust method for assessing the trustworthiness of a research paper and its value in clinical practice.


Methodology: Through detailed literature search, All essential sections and subsection mandatory for a research paper were identified followed by the necessary steps or information required in each section or questions which may arise or needs to addressed were identified. The important questions or steps which are integral in assessing the reliability and validity of a research are gathered during critical review of a research paper.  


Results: Out of 128 full text articles, 49 full-text articles containing robust and pertinent information as per objective were short listed for review.


Conclusion: Critical appraisal of a research paper or project is a fundamental skill in modern medical practice for assessing the worth of clinical research and in providing a guideline of its relevance to the profession.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Umesh G, Karippacheril JG, Magazine R.. Critical appraisal of published literature. Indian J Anaest. 2016;60( 9): 670-673. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5049.190624

Burls A. What is Critical Appraisal? 2nd ed. Oxford, UK:University of Oxford. (What is…? Series).2009. Available from website: http://www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/painres/download/whatis/what_is_critical_appraisal.pdf. Accessed on June 20, 2020

Audit of Submissions: July 2018-June 2019. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2020;25(1):4. doi: 10.1177/1355819619899554. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1355819619899554

Glasziou PP. Information overload: What’s behind it, what’s beyond it? Med J Aust 2008;189:84‑85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.2008.tb01922.x

Sadeghi-Bazargani H, Tabrizi JS, Azami-Aghdash S. Barriers to evidence-based medicine: a systematic review. J Eval Clin Pract 2014;20(6):793-802. doi: 10.1111/jep.12222 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12222

Banzi R, Liberati A, Moschetti I, Tagliabue L, Moja L. A review of online evidence-based practice point-of-care information summary providers. J Med Internet Res 2010;12(3):e26. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1288 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1288

Kwag KH, González-Lorenzo M, Banzi R, Bonovas S, Moja L. Providing Doctors with High-Quality Information: An Updated Evaluation of Web-Based Point-of-Care Information Summaries. J Med Internet Res 2016;18(1):e15. doi: 10.2196/jmir.5234. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.5234

Lenaerts G, Bekkering GE, Goossens M, De Coninck L, Delvaux N, Cordyn S, Adriaenssens J, Vankrunkelsven P. Tools to Assess the Trustworthiness of Evidence-Based Point-of-Care Information for Health Care Professionals: Systematic Review J Med Internet Res 2020;22(1):e15415. URL: https://www.jmir.org/2020/1/e15415. doi: 10.2196/15415. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/15415

Burls A. What is critical appraisal? London, Hayward Medical Communications. 2016. Website: [ http://www.whatisseries.co.uk/what-is-critical-appraisal/.] Accessed on June 18, 2020

Hill MD. How to Review a Clinical Research Paper. Stroke. 2018;49(5): e204-e206. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.118.021286. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.118.021286

Cruz Rivera S, Kyte DG, Aiyegbusi OL, Keeley TJ, Calvert MJ. Assessing the impact of healthcare research: A systematic review of methodological frameworks. PLoS Med. 2017;14(8):e1002370. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002370. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002370

Mårtenssona P, Forsb U, Wallinc S, Zanderd U, Nilssone G H. Evaluating research: A multidisciplinary approach to assessing research practice and quality. Res Policy;2016: 45 (2016) 593–603. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.11.009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.11.009

Guinea J, Sela E, GoÂmez-Nu ñez AJ, Mangwende T, Ambali A, Ngum N, et al. Impact oriented monitoring: A new methodology for monitoring and evaluation of international public health research projects. Res Eval. 2015; 24(2):131±45. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvu034. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvu034

Belcher BM, Rasmussen KE, Kemshaw MR, Zornes DA. Defining and assessing research quality in a transdisciplinary context. Res Eval. 2015; 25:(2016):1–17. doi:10.1093/reseval/rvv025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvv025

Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. BMJ 2010;340:698‑702. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.09.006

Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. 2020 website: [http://www.sign.ac.uk/methodology/checklists.html]. Accessed on 2016 Jun 19.

Strobe Statement. 2020 Available from: [http://www.strobe‑statement.org/index.php?id=available‑checklists]. Accessed on 2016 Jun 19.

Sorensen HT, Rothman KJ. The prognosis for research. BMJ. 2010;340:c703. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c703. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c703

Meltzoff J. Critical Thinking About Research. Washington, DC: Am Psychol Assoc. 2007;23(5):234-243.

Roever L, Resende ES, Diniz ALD, Penha-Silva N, Biondi-Zoccai G, et al. Critical Analysis of Clinical Research Articles: A Guide for Evaluation. Evid Based Med and Pract. 2016; 2(1): e116. Doi: 10.4172/2471-9919.1000e116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4172/2471-9919.1000e116

Al-Jundi A, Sakka S. Critical Appraisal of Clinical Research. J of Clin and Diag Res. 2017;11(5): JE01-JE05. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/26047.9942. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2017/26047.9942

Al-Jundi A, Sakka S. Protocol writing in clinical research. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10(11):ZE10-ZE13j. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2016/21426.8865

Young JA, Solomon MJ. How to Critically Appraise an Article. Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol.2009; 6: 82-91.

Gibson CJ. Critical appraisal: a template to evaluate scientific literature. Dent Update. 2008; 35: 414-417. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12968/denu.2008.35.6.414

MacInnes A, Lamont T. Critical appraisal of a research paper. Scott Uni Med J. 2014;3 (1):10-17.

Röhrig B, du Prel JB, Blettner M. Study design in medical research: part 2 of a series on the evaluation of scientific publications. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2009;106: 184-189.

Röhrig B, du Prel JB, Wachtlin D, Kwiecien R, Blettner M. Sample size calculation in clinical trials: part 13 of a series on evaluation of scientific publications. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2010; 107: 552-556.

Micallef C. Critical analysis: a vital element in healthcare research. Critical analysis: a vital element in healthcare research. Int. J. Behav and Healthcare Res. 2015;5(1/2):105-110. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBHR.2015.071480

Greenhalgh, T. How to read a paper: The basics of evidence-based medicine. 5th ed, New York, United States; John Wiley & Sons: 2014. Pp134-167.

Boudin F, Nie J, Bartlett JC. Combining classifiers for robust PICO element detection. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2010;10:29. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-10-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-10-29

Galdas P. Revisiting Bias in Qualitative Research: Reflections on Its Relationship with Funding and Impact. (Editorial). Int J qualitative Methods. 2017: 16:1-2. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917748992 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917748992

Mackieson P, Shlonsky A, Connolly M. Increasing rigor and reducing bias in qualitative research: A document analysis of parliamentary debates using applied thematic analysis. 2018;18:176-180. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325018786996 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325018786996

Thomas L. Understanding confounding variables. Scribber 2020; website: [https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/confounding-variables/]. Accessed on June 10, 2020

The Belmont Report. 1979 Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical. Retrieved from Website: [https://science.education.nih.gov/supplements/webversions/bioethics/guide/teacher/Mod5_Belmont.pdf] Accessed on June 11, 2020.

American Psychological Association (2010, June 1). American Psychological Association Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. 2011. Retrieved from [ http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx]. Accessed on June 7, 2020

Ethical standards and procedures for research with human beings. Ethics and Research. WHO Manual (Section XV.2) 2020. Retrieved from Website:[ https://www.who.int/ethics/research/en/#:~:text=Research%20ethics%20govern%20the%20standards,and%20welfare%20of%20research%20participants.]. Accessed on June 28, 2020

Ensuring your research is ethical: A guide for Extended Project Qualification students. EPQs ethics guide. Welcome Trust. 2020. Retrieve from website:[ https://wellcome.ac.uk/sites/default/files/wtp057673_0.pdf]. Accessed on June 28, 2020

du Prel JB, Hommel G, Röhrig B, Blettner M. Confidence interval or p-value?: part 4 of a series on evaluation of scientific publications. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2009;106: 335-339. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2009.0335

du Prel JB, Röhrig B, Hommel G, Blettner M. Choosing statistical tests: part 12 of a series on evaluation of scientific publications. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2010; 107: 343-348

Bialocerkowski A, Klupp N, Bragge P. How to read and critically appraise a reliability article? Int J Ther Rehab 2010;17:114‑20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12968/ijtr.2010.17.3.46743

Young J M, Solomon MJ. How to Critically Appraise an Article. Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;6(2):82-91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpgasthep1331

Hameed A, Demetres M, Tam D Y, Rahouma M, Khan F M, Wright D N et al. An assessment of the quality of current clinical meta-analyses BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020;20:105-113. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-00999-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-00999-9

Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, Thuku M, Hamel C, Moran J, et al. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomized or non-randomized studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ. 2017;358:j4008. https://doi.org/10. 1136/bmj.j4008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4008

Roever L, Zoccai GB (2015) Critical Appraisal of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses. Evid Based Med and Prac. 2015;1:1000e106. doi:10.4172/2471-9919.1000e106. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4172/2471-9919.1000e106

Patel N, Bajaj NS. Meta-analyses: How to critically appraise them? J of Nuclear Cardio. 2017; 25(5);1598–1600. doi:10.1007/s12350-017-0898-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-017-0898-8

Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev 2015;4:1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1

Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: Elaboration and explanation. BMJ 2015;349:g7647. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7647

Hutton B, Salanti G, Caldwell DM, Chaimani A, Schmid CH, Cameron C, et al. The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: Checklist and explanations. Ann Intern Med 2015;162:777-784. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/M14-2385

Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: A proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 2000;283:2008-2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.283.15.2008

Downloads

Published

2021-04-08

How to Cite

Ahmed, I. (2021). HOW TO CRITICALLY APPRAISE A RESEARCH PAPER?. International Journal of Research -GRANTHAALAYAH, 9(3), 229–240. https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v9.i3.2021.3779