JBI评价工具--病例报告

www.joannabriggs.org The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools for use in JBI Systematic Reviews Checklist for Case Reports The Joanna Briggs Institute Introduction The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) is an international, membership based research and development organization within the Faculty of Health Sciences at the University of Adelaide. The Institute specializes in promoting and supporting evidence-based healthcare by providing access to resources for professionals in nursing, midwifery, medicine, and allied health.  With over 80 collaborating centres and entities, servicing over 90 countries, the Institute is a recognized global leader in evidence-based healthcare.  JBI Systematic Reviews The  core  of  evidence  synthesis  is  the  systematic review  of  literature  of  a  particular  intervention, condition or issue. The systematic review is essentially an analysis of the available literature (that is, evidence) and 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 this broader view of evidence, the Institute has developed theories, methodologies and rigorous processes  for  the  critical  appraisal  and  synthesis  of these diverse forms 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/incidence, 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 Tools All systematic reviews 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 inclusion in the systematic review (that is – those that meet the inclusion criteria 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 Critical appraisal tools have been developed by the JBI and collaborators and approved by the JBI Scientific Committee following extensive peer review. Although designed for use in systematic reviews, JBI critical appraisal tools can also be used when creating Critically Appraised Topics (CAT), in journal clubs and as an educational tool.  JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case Reports Reviewer                        Date                    Author                            Year        Record Number              Yes No Unclear Not applicable 1. Were patient’s demographic characteristics clearly described? □ □ □ □ 2. Was the patient’s history clearly described and presented as a timeline? □ □ □ □ 3. Was the current clinical condition of the patient on presentation clearly described? □ □ □ □ 4. Were diagnostic tests or assessment methods and the results clearly described? □ □ □ □ 5. Was the intervention(s) or treatment procedure(s) clearly described? □ □ □ □ 6. Was the post-intervention clinical condition clearly described? □ □ □ □ 7. Were adverse events (harms) or unanticipated events identified and described? □ □ □ □ 8. Does the case report provide takeaway lessons? □ □ □ □           Overall appraisal:     Include      □    Exclude      □    Seek further info  □ Comments (Including reason for exclusion) Explanation of case reports critical appraisal    How to cite: The Joanna Briggs Institute. Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers' Manual: 2016 edition. Australia: The Joanna Briggs Institute; 2016. Case Reports Critical Appraisal Tool    Answers: Yes, No, Unclear or Not/Applicable 1. Were patient’s demographic characteristics clearly described? Does the case report clearly describe patient's age, sex, race, medical history, diagnosis, prognosis, 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 and psychosocial history including relevant genetic information, as well as relevant past interventions and their outcomes. (CARE Checklist 2013).