Chronic pancreatitis w eip

Copyright 2013, Northwestern Health Sciences University and Regents of the University of Minnesota. Created for the CAM Research Education Partnership Project through funding from the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (grant number R-25AT003582) Last Update: 09/19/2013

Title of Article: __________________________________________________________________

Summary Research Worksheet

RELEVANCE: Is this article worth taking the time to read? Review the abstract and write your response to the following questions. A greater number of “no” answers means this source of summary research is less likely to be relevant to your practice.

Yes No Maybe

1. Does the summary resource address a specific clinical question that’s meaningful to your patient? Describe the clinical question.

2. Did the summary resource include studies that measured outcomes that patients care about? Explain:

3. Does this summary resource account for recent studies? (If it does not include research published within the last 5 years, you may want to look for more recent reviews or individual trials.)

VALIDITY: Can the results of this article be believed?

Review the rest of the article and write your response to the remaining questions. A greater number of “no” answers means that this summary resource is less likely to be valid, or represent the truth.

Yes No Maybe

1. Did the authors use a comprehensive search strategy? (Look in the “methods” section for key search terms, databases and publication dates) Briefly describe the search methods.

2. Did the authors include the appropriate studies? (The authors should list their criteria for inclusion/exclusion and report excluded studies with the rationale for exclusion)

3. Did the authors appropriately assess and document the quality of the included studies? (Look in the “methods” section to see if multiple authors evaluated each study using a standard critical appraisal method that included assessing randomization, blinding, etc. If authors of the summary resource didn’t critically appraise the original research, it severely limits the validity of their summary. ) Explain:

Copyright 2013, Northwestern Health Sciences University and Regents of the University of Minnesota. Created for the CAM Research Education Partnership Project through funding from the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (grant number R-25AT003582) Last Update: 09/19/2013

Yes No Maybe

4. Did the authors consider the quality of studies when analyzing the data and formulating conclusions? (For example: Did they limit their analysis to only the higher quality studies? Or did they weight the higher quality studies more than low quality studies when making conclusions)

5. Is the summary source free of other biases that could affect the conclusions? Explain:

RESULTS

1. What were the results of this summary resource? 2. How could this summary resource influence your practice?