Nursing Evidence-Based Practice: Research Evidence Appraisal Tool
Article Title: |
Number: | ||||||||
| Author(s): |
PublicationDate: | ||||||||
| Journal: |
|||||||||
| Setting: |
Sample(Composition&size): | ||||||||
| Does this evidence address my EBP question? |
£Yes | £NoDo not proceed with appraisal of this evidence | |||||||
| Level of Evidence (Study Design) | |||||||||
| |
£Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes |
£No £No £No £No |
|||||||
| B. Is this a summary of multiple research studies? If No, go to Non-Research Evidence Appraisal Form. 1. Does it employ a comprehensive search strategy and rigorous appraisal method (Systematic Review)? If No, use Non-Research Evidence Appraisal Tool; if Yes: a. Does it combine and analyze results from the studies to generate a new statistic (effect size)? (Systematic review with meta-analysis) b. Does it analyze and synthesize concepts from qualitative studies? (Systematic review with meta-synthesis) If Yes to either a or b, go to #2B below. 2. For Systematic Reviews and Systematic Reviews with meta-analysis or meta-synthesis: a. Are all studies included RCTs? b. Are the studies a combination of RCTs and quasi-experimental or quasi-experimental only? c. Are the studies a combination of RCTs, quasi-experimental and non-experimental or non-experimental only? d. Are any or all of the included studies qualitative? complete THENEXT SECTION,“STUDY FINDINGS THAT HELP YOU ANSWER THE EBP QUESTION” |
£ LEVEL I £ LEVEL II £ LEVEL IIl £ LEVEL IIl |
£Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes |
£No £No £No £No |
||||||
NOW COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PAGE, “QUALITY APPRAISAL OF RESEARCH STUDIES”, AND ASSIGN A QUALITY SCORE TO YOUR ARTICLE
| Quality Appraisal of Research Studies | ||||
| · Does the researcher identify what is known and not known about the problem and how the study will address any gaps in knowledge?· Was the purpose of the study clearly presented? · Was the literature review current (most sources within last 5 years or classic)? · Was sample size sufficient based on study design and rationale? · If there is a control group: o Were the characteristics and/or demographics similar in both the control and intervention groups? o If multiple settings were used, were the settings similar? o Were all groups equally treated except for the interventiongroup(s)? · Are data collection methods described clearly? · Were the instruments reliable (Cronbach’s α [alpha]> 0.70)? · Was instrument validity discussed? · If surveys/questionnaires were used, was the response rate >25%? · Were the results presented clearly? · If tables were presented, was the narrative consistent with the table content? · Were study limitations identified and addressed? · Were conclusions based on results? |
£Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes |
£No £No £No £No £No £No £No £No £No £No £No £No £No £No £No |
£NA £NA £NA £NA £NA £NA £NA |
|
| Quality Appraisal of Systematic Review with or without Meta-Analysis or Meta-Synthesis | ||||
| · Was the purpose of the systematic review clearly stated?· Were reports comprehensive, with reproducible search strategy? o Key search terms stated o Multiple databases searchedand identified o Inclusion and exclusion criteria stated · Was there a flow diagram showing the number of studies eliminated at each level of review? · Were details of included studies presented (design, sample, methods, results, outcomes, strengths and limitations)? · Were methods for appraising the strength of evidence (level and quality) described? · Were conclusions based on results? o Results were interpreted o Conclusions flowed logically from the interpretation and systematic review question · Did the systematic review include both a section addressing limitations and how they were addressed? |
£Yes£Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes £Yes |
£No£No £No £No £No £No £No £No £No £No £No £No |
||
Quality Rating Based on quality appraisalAHigh quality: consistent, generalizable results; sufficient sample size for the study design; adequate control; definitive conclusions; consistent recommendations based on comprehensiveliterature review that includes thorough reference to scientific evidence |
||||
