Fillable 11 questions to help you evaluate a clinical (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme)

Fill Online, Printable, Fillable, Blank 11 questions to help you evaluate a clinical (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) Form

Use Fill to complete blank online CRITICAL APPRAISAL SKILLS PROGRAMME pdf forms for free. Once completed you can sign your fillable form or send for signing. All forms are printable and downloadable.

11 questions to help you evaluate a clinical (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme)

On average this form takes 6 minutes to complete

The 11 questions to help you evaluate a clinical (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) form is 5 pages long and contains:

  • 0 signatures
  • 27 check-boxes
  • 12 other fields

Country of origin: UK
File type: PDF

Use our library of forms to quickly fill and sign your Critical Appraisal Skills Programme forms online.

BROWSE CRITICAL APPRAISAL SKILLS PROGRAMME FORMS

Related forms
Fill has a huge library of thousands of forms all set up to be filled in easily and signed.
Fill in your chosen form
Sign the form using our drawing tool
Send to someone else to fill in and sign.
find another form
 
Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) part of Oxford Centre for Triple Value Healthcare Ltd www.casp-uk.net
CASP Checklist:
11 questions to help you evaluate a clinical prediction rule
How to use this appraisal tool: Three broad issues need to be considered when appraising a
clinical prediction rule study:
Are the results of the study valid? (Section A)
What are the results? (Section B)
Will the results help locally? (Section C)
The 10 questions on the following pages are designed to help you think about these issues
systematically. The first two questions are screening questions and can be answered quickly.
If the answer to both is “yes”, it is worth proceeding with the remaining questions. There is
some degree of overlap between the questions, you are asked to record a “yes”, “no” or
“can’t tell” to most of the questions. A number of italicised prompts are given after each
question. These are designed to remind you why the question is important. Record your
reasons for your answers in the spaces provided.
About: These checklists were designed to be used as educational pedagogic tools, as part of a
workshop setting, therefore we do not suggest a scoring system. The core CASP checklists
(randomised controlled trial & systematic review) were based on JAMA 'Users’ guides to the
medical literature 1994 (adapted from Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, and Cook DJ), and piloted with
health care practitioners.
This material has been developed by CASP España (CASPe) http://redcaspe.org it was
translated into English and tested by the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme, Oxford, UK
(CASP)
Referencing: we recommend using the Harvard style citation, i.e.: Critical Appraisal Skills
Programme (2018). CASP (insert name of checklist i.e. Clinical Prediction Rule) Checklist.
[online] Available at: URL. Accessed: Date Accessed.
©CASP this work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution – Non-
Commercial-Share A like. To view a copy of this license, visit
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ www.casp-uk.net
2
Section A: Are the results of the study valid?
1. Is the CPR clearly defined?
Yes
HINT:
• is
the type of patients to whom the CPR
will be applied clearly defined
•
are the variables included in the rule
clearly defined
•
is the outcome relevant and is it clinically
reasonable (the outcome can be expressed
as a probability or as a course of action)
Can’t Tell
No
Comments:
2. Did the population from which
the rule was derived include an
appropriate spectrum of
patients?
Yes
HINT: Consider
• Is it adequate the way the patients were
selected
• The spectrum of patient, to whom the
rule will apply, is represented well
Can’t Tell
No
Comments:
3. Was the rule validated in a
different group of patients?
HINT:
•
it’s not good enough that the rule had a
good performance on the patient group
used to derive it. The rule should be
validated in a different set of patients
•
the validation was done in a group of
patients similar to the one used to derive
it
Comments:
Is it worth continuing?
Paper for appraisal and reference:
3
4. Were the predictor variables and
the outcome evaluated in a
blinded fashion?
Yes
HINT:
• did people evaluating the outcome
know the predictor variables
• did people evaluating the predictor
variables know the outcome
Can’t Tell
No
Comments:
5. Were the predictor variables and
the outcome evaluates in the
whole sample selected initially?
Yes
HINT:
•
are exclusions and drop outs well
described and do the authors discuss the
reasons for them
•
sometimes the outcome cannot be
measured in the same way in all patients
Can’t Tell
No
Comments:
6. Are the statistical methods used
to construct and validate the rule
clearly described?
Yes
HINT:
•
were all important variables included
and the positivity criteria explained
•
is the statistical method adequately
described
•
was the reliability of the rule considered
Can’t Tell
No
Comments:
Section B: What are the results?
4
7. Can the performance of the rule be calculated?
HINT:
• performance results can be
presented as: Sens, Sp, +LR, -LR,
ROC curve, calibration curves etc.
• sensitivity = a/(a+c)
• specificity = d/(b+d)
• LR+ = sens/(1-sp)
• LR- = (1-sens)/sp
Outcome +
Outcome -
Rule +
a
b
Rule -
c
d
Comments:
8. How precise was the estimate of the
treatment effect?
(did they try to refine the rule with
other variables to see whether the
precision could be improved or the
rule simplified?)
HINT: Think about
• the sample size and the number of
variables included in the CPR
• is the rule robust, has there been any
attempt to refine it
Comments:
Section C: Will the results help locally? Are the findings applicable to the scenario?
5
9. Would the prediction rule be
reliable and the results
interpretable if used for your
patient?
Yes
HINT: Consider
• is your setting too different from that of
the study
Can’t Tell
No
Comments:
10. Is the rule acceptable in your
case?
Yes
HINT: Consider
• the ease of use and the availability of
the rule and the costs
• if the rule is reasonable from a clinical
point of view
Can’t Tell
No
Comments:
11. Would the results of the rule
modify your decision about the
management of the patient, or
the information you can give to
him/her?
Yes
HINT: Consider
• in addition to your opinion, might there
be studies analysing the impact (in
monetary terms or health results) of the
rule
• if nothing will change, the rule is at best
useless in terms of benefit to the
patients
• how the initial estimation has changed
after applying the rule, and the effect it
has had on the action threshold
Can’t Tell
No
Comments:
Download
Save PDF to desktop
Email
Email completed PDF
Send for Signing
Email for others to sign
Print
Print document
Choose a Field
Click on a field and
select the person that should complete it
Want to add a signature?
You can add a signature field
and assign it to someone else
to sign
Choose a Field
Click on a field and
select the person that should complete it

11 questions to help you evaluate a clinical (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme)

This document is locked as it has been sent for signing.

You have successfully completed this document.

Other parties need to complete fields in the document. You will recieve an email notification when the document has been completed by all parties.

This document has been signed by all parties.

Completed 10 March 2021

Message

View Audit Log
Print With Audit Log
Duplicate Document