I thoroughly recommend reading the following document which evaluated a number (194) of tools for appraising non-randomised designs. This document, available full-text on the web
http://www.hta.nhsweb.nhs.uk/fullmono/mon727.pdf, recommends six (of the 194 checklists) which are suitable when systematically reviewing non-randomised evidence:
Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D’Amico R, Sowden AJ, Sakarovitch C, Song F, et al. Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. Health Technol Assess 2003;7(27).
Papers:
556102 Knowledge for Health Research
775617 Introduction to Epidemiology
555338 Health in the Context of Aotearoa New Zealand
556104 Health Promotion
>>> "Anderson Lucy (RW6) PAHNT" <
[log in to unmask]> 07/12/06 9:27 p.m. >>>
Hi
Can anyone point me in the right direction for a critical appraisal tool for a 'Prospective non randomized study' or suggest a tool that would do the job?
I usually use the CASP tools but I know there are others.
Any help or comments welcome.
Thanks
Lucy
Lucy Anderson
Clinical Librarian
Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust
Education Centre Library, Royal Oldham Hospital
0161 627 8463
Education Centre Library, Rochdale Infirmary
01706 517770
email:
[log in to unmask] > -----Original Message-----
> From: Evidence based health (EBH) [
mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH automatic digest system
> Sent: 12 July 2006 00:02
> To:
[log in to unmask]> Subject: EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH Digest - 10 Jul 2006 to 11 Jul 2006 (#2006-110)
>
> << Message: EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH Digest - 10 Jul 2006 to 11 Jul 2006 (#2006-110) >> << Message: University of Oxford DPHPC Journal Watch >> << Message: Re: more on Why is EBM important?- Real world- not Ivory Tower opinion >>
