5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Critical Appraisal of the Papers Published in the "Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences", 2007-2010

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective: This study has been done in order to evaluate the papers published in the "Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences" from 2007 to 2010.

          Methods: A questionnaire was developed according to the design, evidence level, and recommendations to write scientific papers. Validity was achieved by consulting experts. Reliability was tested by re-evaluation of 7 randomly selected papers, one month after the first evaluation by Pearson correlation coefficient (r = 0.8). Different parts of the paper, including title, abstract, introduction, materials and methods, results, discussion, and references, were evaluated by a total of 47 questions. Each required item was judged as: appropriate, partially appropriate, not appropriate, and not applicable. SPSS software was used for descriptive analysis.

          Results: From spring 2007 to summer 2010, 7 issues with 72 papers were published. The most frequent problem in the title was that one could not understand the design of the research by reading it. In the abstract part, in 90% of papers, time and setting of research were not mentioned. Statistical test was not mentioned in 70%, and reliability of the questionnaires was not mentioned in 70% of papers. The discussion part was the hardest part to judge and had few inappropriate issues, such as unnecessary repetition of introduction and/or results; in 20% of papers the conclusion was not appropriate based on the research design.

          Conclusions: The evaluated papers had strong points, yet more effort is needed for them to approach excellence.

          Declaration of interest: None.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          How to read a paper. Getting your bearings (deciding what the paper is about).

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Users' guides to the medical literature: XX. Integrating research evidence with the care of the individual patient. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group.

            Clinicians can use research results to determine optimal care for an individual patient by using a patient's baseline risk estimate, clinical prediction guidelines that quantitate an individual patient's potential for benefit, and published articles. We propose that when clinicians are determining the likelihood that treatment will prevent the target event (at the expense of adverse events) in a patient that they also incorporate the patient's values. The 3 main elements to joint clinical decision making are disclosure of information about the risks and benefits of therapeutic alternatives, exploration of the patient's values about both the therapy and potential outcomes, and the actual decision. In addressing the patient's risk of adverse events without treatment and risk of harm with therapy, clinicians must recognize that patients are rarely identical to the average study patient. Differences between study participants and patients in real-world practice tend to be quantitative (differences in degree of risk of the outcome or responsiveness to therapy) rather than qualitative (no risk or adverse response to therapy). The number needed to treat and number needed to harm can be used to generate patient-specific estimates relative to the risk of the outcome event. Clinicians must consider a patient's risk of adverse events from any intervention and incorporate the patient's values in clinical decision making by using information about the risks and benefits of therapeutic alternatives. JAMA. 2000;283:2829-2836
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Critical appraisal of scientific articles: part 1 of a series on evaluation of scientific publications.

              In the era of evidence-based medicine, one of the most important skills a physician needs is the ability to analyze scientific literature critically. This is necessary to keep medical knowledge up to date and to ensure optimal patient care. The aim of this paper is to present an accessible introduction into critical appraisal of scientific articles. Using a selection of international literature, the reader is introduced to the principles of critical reading of scientific articles in medicine. For the sake of conciseness, detailed description of statistical methods is omitted. Widely accepted principles for critically appraising scientific articles are outlined. Basic knowledge of study design, structuring of an article, the role of different sections, of statistical presentations as well as sources of error and limitation are presented. The reader does not require extensive methodological knowledge. As far as necessary for critical appraisal of scientific articles, differences in research areas like epidemiology, clinical, and basic research are outlined. Further useful references are presented. Basic methodological knowledge is required to select and interpret scientific articles correctly.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Iran J Psychiatry Behav Sci
                Iran J Psychiatry Behav Sci
                IJPBS
                Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences
                Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences (Sari, Iran )
                1735-8639
                1735-9287
                Autumn-Winter 2013
                : 7
                : 2
                : 77-82
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Professor, Department of Pediatrics AND Thalassemia Research Center, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran.
                [2 ]General Practitioner, Traditional and Complementary Medicine Research Center, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran.
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author: Khadijeh Rabiei MD, General Practitioner, Traditional and Complementary Medicine Research Center, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran. Tel/Fax: +98 151-3244893, Email: mprabie@yahoo.com
                Article
                ijpbs-7-077
                3939991
                24644513
                6c72e2a5-cd48-4d13-b150-886d6074d7dd
                © 2013 : Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 14 April 2012
                : 18 May 2012
                : 20 November 2012
                Categories
                Original Article

                evidance base medicine,critical appraisal,research methodology

                Comments

                Comment on this article