Premium
A practical educational tool for teaching child‐care hospital professionals attending evidence‐based practice courses for continuing medical education to appraise internal validity in systematic reviews
Author(s) -
Rosati Paola,
Porzsolt Franz
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
journal of evaluation in clinical practice
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.737
H-Index - 73
eISSN - 1365-2753
pISSN - 1356-1294
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2012.01889.x
Subject(s) - critical appraisal , internal validity , systematic review , medicine , medical education , medline , feeling , casp , nursing , psychology , family medicine , alternative medicine , social psychology , physics , pathology , nuclear magnetic resonance , protein structure , political science , law , protein structure prediction
Abstract Rationale, aims and objectives Having a quick, practical, educational tool designed for busy child‐care professionals to check whether systematic reviews ( SR s) contain valid information would help them regularly update their evidence‐based knowledge and apply it to their patients. Continuing our annual workshop courses encouraging paediatric hospital professionals to use evidence‐based information, in a preliminary study, we compared the commonly used Critical Appraisal Skill Programme ( CASP ) questionnaire for appraising overall internal validity in SR s with a new, practical tool designed to check internal validity quickly. Method During a course in 2010, two ‘teacher‐brokers’ taught experienced paediatric hospital professionals to use and compare the CASP and the new practical tool to appraise a Cochrane SR on beclomethasone for asthma in children by assessing internal validity only from the two most weighted randomized controlled trials in the forest plot. At 15 days and 6 months, participants then answered questionnaires designed to assess qualitative data including feelings about working together, memorization and possibly provide feedback for Cochrane reviewers. Results Using the CASP , participants agreed that the Cochrane SR analysed contained overall valid results. Conversely, using the new quick tool, they found poor internal validity. Participants worked well together in a group, took less time to apply the new tool than the CASP (1 vs. 2.5 hours) and provided Cochrane feedback. Conclusions Our quick practical tool for teaching critical appraisal encourages busy child‐care hospital professionals to work together, carefully check validity in SRs , apply the findings in clinical practice and provide useful feedback for Cochrane reviewers.