Print

Print


Thanks, Andy. Good to be reminded of the growing recognition of need for evaluation methodology for complex interventions. 
GRADE is good in that it gives general guidance on how to rate the strength of evidence. What other tools, like the McMaster’s Critical Review Form, do is provide a checklist for checking internal validity and some also external validity.
Thanks again,
Kev

> On 2 Mar 2019, at 14:34, Pennington, Andy <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> Also look to Grade and Cerqual to appraise a body of evidence, not just individual studies. Note the limitations of current QA approaches if considering mixed-method designs and complex and community-led interventions. There’s a series of papers published recently on the latter issues (not at a PC, but Mark Petticrew was one of the authors of the series).
> 
> 
> 
> All the best, Andy.
> 
> On 1 Mar 2019, at 17:33, Kev Hopayian <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
> 
>> Thanks, Angela. Sorry my last email did not go to whole group so including it now.
>> 
>> That was a useful link. Respect is due to the Occupational Therapists for this awesome work.
>> 
>> So interesting to see that my searches had not picked it up. 
>> 
>> Kev
>> 
>>> On 1 Mar 2019, at 17:09, Angela Benfield <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> https://srs-mcmaster.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Guidelines-for-Critical-Review-Form-Quantitative-Studies.pdf <https://srs-mcmaster.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Guidelines-for-Critical-Review-Form-Quantitative-Studies.pdf>
>>> https://srs-mcmaster.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Critical-Review-Form-Quantitative-Studies-English.pdf <https://srs-mcmaster.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Critical-Review-Form-Quantitative-Studies-English.pdf>
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 10:19 AM Kev Hopayian <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>> Thanks, Angie. Had a search on the site but not immediately obvious. Do you have a URL?
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 1 Mar 2019, at 12:58, Angela Benfield <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi-
>>>> The McMasters has one, but it is on the basic side. It is out of occupational therapy. It doesn’t do systematic reviews as they did not exist when it was published.
>>>> Angie
>>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 5:48 AM Kev Hopayian <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>>> Dear List,
>>>> Does anyone know of a generic appraisal tool ie that can be used for any type of study? The ones mentioned in reference below do not seem to be truly generic
>>>> 
>>>> Katrak, P
>>>> 2004
>>>> A systematic review of the content of critical appraisal tools.
>>>> 1325
>>>> 36310
>>>> 0
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Prof. Kev (Kevork) Hopayian, 
>>>> MD FRCGP
>>>> Clinical Professor, University of Nicosia, Cyprus
>>>> RCGP [INT] Educational Consultant
>>>> Sessional GP, Suffolk
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> To unsubscribe from the EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH list, click the following link:
>>>> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH&A=1 <https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH&A=1>
>> 
>> 
>> To unsubscribe from the EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH list, click the following link:
>> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH&A=1 <https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH&A=1>

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH&A=1