Nursing Evidence-Based Practice: Research Evidence Appraisal Tool

Article Title:

£Yes

£Yes

£Yes

£No

£No

£No

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

·         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

£No

£No

£No

£No

£No

£No

£No

£No

£No

£No

£No

£No

£No

£No

£NA

£NA

£NA

£NA

£NA

£NA

£NA

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

£No

£No

£No

£No

£No

£No

£No

£No

£No

£No

Quality Rating Based on quality appraisal

AHigh 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

BGood quality: reasonably consistent results; sufficient sample size for the study design; some control, and fairly definitive conclusions; reasonably consistent recommendations based on fairly comprehensive literature review that includes some reference to scientific evidence

C  Low quality or major flaws: little evidence with inconsistent results; insufficient sample size for the study design; conclusions cannot be drawn