JBI評價工具--病例報(bào)告

1、he Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal toolsfor use in JBI Systematic ReviewsChecklist for Case Reportsresearch/The Joanna Briggs InstituteIntroductionan international, the Faculty of specializes inmembership based research Health Sciences at the promoting and supportingevidence-based healthc

2、are by providingaccess to resourcesforprofessionalsinThe Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) is and development organization within University of Adelaide. The InstituteWith over 80 collaboratingthe Institute is a recognizednursing, midwifery, medicine, and allied health. centres and entities, servicing o

3、ver 90 countries, global leader in evidence-based healthcare.JBI Systematic ReviewsThe core of evidence synthesis is the systematic review of literature ofa particular intervention, condition or issue. The systematic review is essentially an analysis of the available literature (that is, evidence) a

4、nd a judgment of the effectiveness or otherwise of a practice, involving a series of complex steps. The JBI takes a particular view on what counts as evidence and the methods utilized to synthesize those different types of evidence. In line with thisbroader view of evidence, the Institute has develo

5、ped theories, methodologies and rigorous processes for the critical appraisal and synthesis of these diverseforms of evidence in order to aid in clinical decision-making in health care. There now exists JBI guidance for conducting reviews of effectiveness research, qualitative research, prevalence/i

6、ncidence, etiology/risk, economic evaluations, text/opinion, diagnostic test accuracy, mixed-methods, umbrella reviews and scoping reviews. Further information regarding JBI systematic reviews can be found in the JBI Reviewer s Manual on our website.JBI Critical Appraisal ToolsAll systematic reviews

7、 incorporate a process of critique or appraisal of the research evidence. The purpose of this appraisal is to assess the methodological quality of a study and to determine the extent to which a study has addressed the possibility of bias in its design, conduct and analysis. All papers selected for i

8、nclusionin the systematic review (that is those that meet the inclusioncriteria described in the protocol) need to be subjected to rigorous appraisal by two critical appraisers. The results of this appraisal can then be used to inform synthesis and interpretation of the results of the study. JBI Cri

9、tical appraisaltools have been developed by theJBI and collaborators andapprovedbytheJBIScientific Committee following extensive peer review. Although designed for use in systematic reviews, JBI criticalappraisal tools canalso beusedwhencreatingCritically AppraisedTopics (CAT), injournalclubsand asa

10、neducationaltool.YesNoUn clearNotapplicableOverall appraisal:In cludeExcludeSeek furtherJBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case ReportsReviewerDateAuthorYearRecord Number1. Were patient s demographic characteristics clearly described?2. Was the patient s history clearly described and prese nted as

11、 a timeli ne?3. Was the curre nt cli ni cal con diti on of the patient on presentation clearly described?4. Were diagnostic tests or assessment methods and the results clearly described?5. Was the in terve nti on(s) or treatme nt procedure(s) clearly described?6. Was the post-i nterve nti on cli ni

12、cal con diti on clearly described?7. Were adverse eve nts (harms) or unan ticipated eve nts ide ntified and described?8. Does the case report provide takeaway less ons?info |Explanation of case reports critical appraisalHow to cite: The Joanna Briggs Institute. Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers Manu

13、al: 2016 edition. Australia: The Joanna Briggs Institute; 2016.Case Reports Critical Appraisal ToolAnswers: Yes, No, Unclear or Not/Applicable1. Were patient s demographic characteristics clearly described?Does the case report clearly describe patients age, sex, race, medical history, diagnosis, pro

14、gnosis, previous treatments, past and current diagnostic test results, and medications? The setting and context may also be described.2. Was the patient s history clearly described and presented as a timeline?A good case report will clearly describe the history of the patient, their medical, family

15、and psychosocial history including relevant genetic information, as well as relevant past interventions and their outcomes. (CARE Checklist 2013).3. Was the currentclinicalconditionof the patienton presentation clearlydescribed?The current clinicalconditionof thepatient shouldbe describedin detailin

16、cluding the uniqueness of the condition/disease, symptoms, frequency and severity.The case report should also be able to present whether differential diagnoses was considered.4. Were diagnostic tests or methods and the results clearly described?A reader of the case report should be provided sufficie

17、nt information to understand how the patient was assessed. It is important that all appropriate tests are ordered to confirm a diagnosis and therefore the case report should provide a clear description of various diagnostic tests used (whether a gold standard or alternativediagnostictests). Photogra

18、phs or illustrationsof diagnosticprocedures, radiographs, or treatment procedures are usuallypresented whenappropriate to convey a clear message to readers.5. Was the intervention(s) or treatment procedure(s) clearly described?It is importa ntto clearlyclin icia nswill be readi ngthe paper and there

19、fore may enable clear understandingof the treatmentprotocol.The reportshould describe the treatment/interventionprotocol type of effects.in detail; for .in pharmacologicaldrug, route of adm ini strati on,drugmanagement of dentaldosage and frequency,anxiety - the and any sidedescribe treatment or int

20、erventionprocedures as other6. Was the post-intervention clinical condition clearly described?A good case report should clearly describe the clinical condition post-interventionin terms of the prese nee or lack thereof symptoms. The outcomes of management/treatment when presented as images or figure

21、s would help in conveying the in formati on to the reader/cli ni cia n.7. Were adverse events (harms) or unanticipated events identified and described?With any treatme nt/i nterve ntio n/drug, there are bound to be some adverse eve nts and in some cases, they may be severe. It is important that adverse events are clearly documented and described, particularl