Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38836144›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

Dissecting Through the Literature: A Review of the Critical Appraisal Process.

Rawan Almutairi, Ahmad Alsarraf, Danah Alkandari, Hasan Ashkanani, Abeer Albazali

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Rawan AlmutairiDermatology, Farwaniya Hospital, Farwaniya, KWT.
Ahmad AlsarrafDermatology, Farwaniya Hospital, Farwaniya, KWT.
Danah AlkandariDermatology, Farwaniya Hospital, Farwaniya, KWT.
Hasan AshkananiDermatology, Farwaniya Hospital, Farwaniya, KWT.
Abeer AlbazaliDermatology, Farwaniya Hospital, Farwaniya, KWT.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Critical appraisal is a crucial step in evidence-based practice, enabling researchers to evaluate the credibility and applicability of research findings. Healthcare professionals are encouraged to cultivate critical appraisal skills to assess the trustworthiness and value of available evidence. This process involves scrutinizing key components of a research publication, understanding the strengths and weaknesses of the study, and assessing its relevance to a specific context. It is essential for researchers to become familiar with the core elements of a research article and utilize key questions and guidelines to rigorously assess a study. This paper aims to provide an overview of the critical appraisal process. By understanding the main points of critical appraisal, researchers can assess the quality, relevance, and reliability of articles, thereby enhancing the validity of their findings and decision-making processes.

Indexed as

critical appraisalliterature reviewliterature review of diseasereview of literature

Identifiers

PMID38836144
PMCPMC11148477

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.