Satisfaction Guarantee

First time here?

usewelcome15 to get 15% off

CRITICAL APPRAISAL AND LITERATURE REVIEW IN NEONATAL MEDICINE

How to critically appraise 3 papers, Steps need to follow and to made comparisons and combinations on the 3 papers together in table form.and then follow it with 1-2 pages of discussion and statistical,, in written form in combination between the 3 papers.you will found 2 sorts of questions please follow it and If any duplication, neglect it.Publication details, Title/ Author/ Journal/ Abstract conflicts of interest, when was it published, funding bias, peer reviewed, journals impact factor.Study design; what type, single/multi centre, retro/prospective.Background currency of evidence, reliability of data, pilot study? data transferable; non/inferiority, ?pilot study, repeatability coefficientMethods: What the researchers did, are they comparable. Was there blinding. How was the outcome measure defined? Was it consistent across all studies? Were there any deviations from protocols? Were the methods clear and reproducible?Aims/objectives/outcomes; Intention to treat, sensitivity/specificity.Ethics; parents consent or ethics committee approval,Sample/ Population; how recruited, inclusion/exclusion, justified size, comparable groups, power calculation?Data collection; limitations, confounding variables and remove, risk of Type1 or 2 error, reliability/validityData analysis/ results; what statistical tools used, why used, parametric or non-parametric, linier regression- look atDiscussion/ RecommendationReferences Harvard system of referencing.List of appendices as required1- What is the research questionWhat is the scientific rationale?Is there a pre-defined hypothesis?Where was the study conducted?What was the study population?What intervention(s) were compared?What outcomes were considered?2- Is the study ethical?Was there a real need to conduct the trial? Was there equipoise when the trial was initiated?Was the study approved by an ethics committee?Did patients (or carers) give informed consent?Was the trial of sufficient size to reach a meaningful conclusion?Was there an independent DSMB?What role did the funder(s) play?3- Is the study design valid and appropriate?What is the trial design?What treatments are being studied?Who is included in the trial?Was randomisation performed? If so, how and could bias have been introduced?Was the study blinded? If not, is the lack of blinding likely to introduce any bias?Were individuals in the different treatment groups treated equally throughout the trial?4- What are the results?How many patients were included in the trial, compared to the planned trial size?Did randomisation work?Did any patients drop out of the trial if so, did drop-out rates differ by treatment arm and what analytical approach was used to allow for lossto-follow-up and treatment switches?5- What are the implications of the findings for clinical practice?Generalisability of population and setting and interventionConsideration of all important outcomes (reflecting effectiveness, safety, acceptability of treatment)Benefits and costsApplication in clinical practice (patients treatment preferences, other clinical considerations)