Critical appraisal topics provide a summary of research evidence organized around a clinical question. They offer a critique of the current research literature and a statement of the clinical relevance. Specific sections of the study include the research question, the framework or background of the question, and the study design. Methodological and statistical criteria are examined in the analysis of the studies. The assignment this week will give you the opportunity to pull all the evidence-based tools together that you have studied during the course. It is also an opportunity to fully research a question of interest and hopefully develop a greater understanding of the problem. These critical appraisal topic studies provide a means of dissemination of research findings to professionals and patients to improve clinical practice.
The purpose of this assignment is to present a complete critical appraisal of a new topic of your choice, relative to your discipline, expressed as a focused PICOT question, using the theory and processes that have been presented in this course. Please note you must select a different clinical, administrative, or academic question for this assignment than you used for either M3/A1 or M7/A2, and therefore, different literature. This will broaden your understanding of EBP, and further your skills in creating focused PICOT questions and critically appraising peer-reviewed journal articles.
A critical appraisal study typically includes 3-5 current (within the past 5 years) high-quality, peer-reviewed, research studies. Remember we are looking for the best available evidence for inclusion, using accepted standards for evidence-based practice. This assignment should be completed as a paper. To enhance organization, ensure all headings (and subheadings, where applicable) are clearly specified and all components of the critical appraisal study are addressed. The document should be 6-8 pages in length, not including the title page and references.
Your critical appraisal/review summary should include the following information and sections:
- Title/cover page
- Abstract (structured): This should be a structured abstract for your review summary as a whole. The usual headings are Purpose, Methods, Results, and Conclusion. Follow current APA formatting rules and remember that abstracts should be concise. While the (structured) abstract appears first in the paper, this section is always written last.
- Introduction (include the following):
- Importance of the problem
- Search strategy: Identify the databases you searched (e.g., PubMed, Ovid, CINAHL)
- Inclusion and exclusion criteria used, relative to the search strategy (e.g., a certain date range; specific article types, such as systematic reviews and RCTs; specific topic areas)
- Results of search: Indicate how many relevant research journal articles were located
- Clinical Scenario
- Focused PICOT Question
For each article (note the articles you select should constitute your “best evidence”):
- Follow the outline in Box 19.1 (Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2015) for quantitative research studies. Note examples for a descriptive correlational study and an RCT are provided. Use the general guidelines, drawing on the examples, for research articles with other study designs, such as systematic reviews and cohort studies.
The info from box 19.1 is as follows from the book:
- Significance of the problem and the “so what?” factor
- Specific Aim of the study
- Research question(s) or
- Theoretical/conceptual framework
- Study design
- Sampling design
- Sampling criteria
- Inclusion criteria
- Exclusion criteria
- Independent variable(s) (in an experimental study, the intervention being proposed)
- Should you elect to include (appropriately) qualitative research studies, also, follow the guidelines in Box 20.2.
The info from box 19.1 is as follows from the book:
- Identify a study question
- Review the literature
- Define the theoretical perspective
- Select and appropriate research design
- Formulate a purpose statement
- Establish study significance
- Describe the research procedures
- Discuss study limitations
- Include the ranking for the level of evidence (e.g., 1a or 1b). Use the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine definitions and levels
- Provide a brief conclusion at the end of eacharticle
- Discussion/Clinical Bottom Line: This section should synthesize (via comparing and contrasting) the evidence from the research articles. A final “bottom line” recommendation should be put forth, based on the combined findings.
- Do not exceed 6-8 pages, excluding the title page and references.
- Limit the peer-reviewed journal research articles to 3-5.
- Be sure to follow current APA formatting and scholarly writing guidelines.
- Please include your research articles with your assignment submission.
5. Create a critically appraised topic (CAT).
1. Write an evidence-based critical appraisal topic for a focused question using 3-5 quality studies
- Critical appraisal study includes all of the following: • Selected a different clinical, administrative, or academic question than used previously • Evaluated 3-5 recent (within the past 5 years) high-quality, peer-reviewed, research studies • Included a structured abstract • Included an Introduction, with the following information/sections: (a) importance of the problem; (b) search strategy (databases searched; inclusion/exclusion criteria used for search); (c) results of search • Provided a clinical scenario • Included a focused PICOT question, utilizing the appropriate template for the type of question • Included an overall discussion/clinical bottom line to conclude the paper
- For each article: (a) Used the quantitative (when applicable) clinical study outline in Box 19.1, following the appropriate examples from Boxes 19.2 and 19.3; (b) for qualitative (when applicable) studies, followed the guidelines in Box 20.2; (c) identified the level of evidence used, based on the Oxford/Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine’s definitions; (d) provided a brief conclusion
- Excellent structure and organization of content; included 3-5 current, peer-reviewed journal articles presented separately and submitted with the assignment; stays within the 6-8-page limit (not including the title/cover page and references); used headings and subheadings (when applicable)