{"title":"对一篇原创研究文章的批判性评价。","authors":"Sham Santhanam, Vinod Ravindran, Chris Wincup","doi":"10.1177/14782715251369964","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Critical appraisal of evidence involves carefully evaluating a study's validity, reliability, applicability and generalisability. It is essential for all clinicians and those involved in academic publishing. A manuscript must adhere to two sets of standards. First, reporting guidelines ensure uniformity, transparency and clarity. Then, critical appraisal tools or criteria assess the study's methodological robustness. The manuscript may undergo a preliminary screening before we initiate the critical appraisal process. The foremost criterion is evaluating the journal's quality, assessing the study topic, design and sample size, and checking if the study objectives and outcome measures have been clearly stated. An original study is typically presented in the standard 'IMRaD' format, with each section addressing a specific set of questions. The primary purpose of the 'Introduction' section is to justify the study's objective. The 'Methods' section is crucial to the manuscript. It aids in assessing the validity of the research, describes the critical parameters in a study protocol and ensures the study's replicability. The main components covered in the 'Methods' section include the study question, design, population, sample size, outcome measures, statistical analysis and details of ethics approval. The 'Results' section should discuss the study's findings, which are outlined in the objectives. The 'Discussion' section covers the implications of the study, which should be balanced, and the interpretation in this section should align with the reported results. The validity of a study is nothing but its closeness to the truth, that is, the extent to which the results are accurate and free from bias. Hence, minimising this chance of bias in a study makes it more valid. Internal validity generally reflects a study's methodological robustness, and external validity reflects the generalisability or applicability. In this era of evidence-based medicine, critical appraisal becomes necessary as people always discuss practising it in their daily clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":46606,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh","volume":" ","pages":"14782715251369964"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Critical appraisal of an original research article.\",\"authors\":\"Sham Santhanam, Vinod Ravindran, Chris Wincup\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14782715251369964\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Critical appraisal of evidence involves carefully evaluating a study's validity, reliability, applicability and generalisability. It is essential for all clinicians and those involved in academic publishing. A manuscript must adhere to two sets of standards. First, reporting guidelines ensure uniformity, transparency and clarity. Then, critical appraisal tools or criteria assess the study's methodological robustness. The manuscript may undergo a preliminary screening before we initiate the critical appraisal process. The foremost criterion is evaluating the journal's quality, assessing the study topic, design and sample size, and checking if the study objectives and outcome measures have been clearly stated. An original study is typically presented in the standard 'IMRaD' format, with each section addressing a specific set of questions. The primary purpose of the 'Introduction' section is to justify the study's objective. The 'Methods' section is crucial to the manuscript. It aids in assessing the validity of the research, describes the critical parameters in a study protocol and ensures the study's replicability. The main components covered in the 'Methods' section include the study question, design, population, sample size, outcome measures, statistical analysis and details of ethics approval. The 'Results' section should discuss the study's findings, which are outlined in the objectives. The 'Discussion' section covers the implications of the study, which should be balanced, and the interpretation in this section should align with the reported results. The validity of a study is nothing but its closeness to the truth, that is, the extent to which the results are accurate and free from bias. Hence, minimising this chance of bias in a study makes it more valid. Internal validity generally reflects a study's methodological robustness, and external validity reflects the generalisability or applicability. In this era of evidence-based medicine, critical appraisal becomes necessary as people always discuss practising it in their daily clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46606,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"14782715251369964\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14782715251369964\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14782715251369964","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Critical appraisal of an original research article.
Critical appraisal of evidence involves carefully evaluating a study's validity, reliability, applicability and generalisability. It is essential for all clinicians and those involved in academic publishing. A manuscript must adhere to two sets of standards. First, reporting guidelines ensure uniformity, transparency and clarity. Then, critical appraisal tools or criteria assess the study's methodological robustness. The manuscript may undergo a preliminary screening before we initiate the critical appraisal process. The foremost criterion is evaluating the journal's quality, assessing the study topic, design and sample size, and checking if the study objectives and outcome measures have been clearly stated. An original study is typically presented in the standard 'IMRaD' format, with each section addressing a specific set of questions. The primary purpose of the 'Introduction' section is to justify the study's objective. The 'Methods' section is crucial to the manuscript. It aids in assessing the validity of the research, describes the critical parameters in a study protocol and ensures the study's replicability. The main components covered in the 'Methods' section include the study question, design, population, sample size, outcome measures, statistical analysis and details of ethics approval. The 'Results' section should discuss the study's findings, which are outlined in the objectives. The 'Discussion' section covers the implications of the study, which should be balanced, and the interpretation in this section should align with the reported results. The validity of a study is nothing but its closeness to the truth, that is, the extent to which the results are accurate and free from bias. Hence, minimising this chance of bias in a study makes it more valid. Internal validity generally reflects a study's methodological robustness, and external validity reflects the generalisability or applicability. In this era of evidence-based medicine, critical appraisal becomes necessary as people always discuss practising it in their daily clinical practice.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh (JRCPE) is the College’s quarterly, peer-reviewed journal, with an international circulation of 8,000. It has three main emphases – clinical medicine, education and medical history. The online JRCPE provides full access to the contents of the print journal and has a number of additional features including advance online publication of recently accepted papers, an online archive, online-only papers, online symposia abstracts, and a series of topic-specific supplements, primarily based on the College’s consensus conferences.