Critical Appraisal Systems for Scientific Evidence [Neurosurgery Wiki]

This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong.
====== Critical Appraisal Systems for Scientific Evidence ======

//[[J.Sales-Llopis]]//

//Neurosurgery Department, [[General University Hospital Alicante]], [[Spain]]//
----

----


=== Definition ===
[[Critical appraisal]] refers to the [[systematic]] [[evaluation]] of clinical research [[evidence]] to assess its [[validity]], [[result]]s, and [[relevance]] before applying it to [[decision-making]] in healthcare.

----

=== Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools ===
  * **Purpose**: Evaluate methodological quality across various study types (RCTs, cohort studies, case series, qualitative research, etc.).
  * **Strengths**: Detailed checklists tailored to each design; transparent criteria.
  * **Limitations**: Time-consuming; less commonly used in some medical specialties.


=== GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) ===
  * **Purpose**: Rates certainty of evidence and strength of clinical recommendations.
  * **Strengths**: Widely endorsed by WHO, Cochrane, and others; integrates evidence with values/preferences.
  * **Limitations**: Complex for non-specialists; primarily designed for guideline development.

=== CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) ===
  * **Purpose**: Provides structured checklists for evaluating studies, especially qualitative and RCTs.
  * **Strengths**: Easy to use; ideal for teaching; widely adopted in nursing and public health.
  * **Limitations**: May oversimplify complex methodological issues.


=== AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews) ===
  * **Purpose**: Assesses the quality of systematic reviews.
  * **Strengths**: Validated tool; helps distinguish high- from low-quality reviews.
  * **Limitations**: Not applicable to primary studies; requires familiarity with systematic review standards.


=== SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network) Checklists ===
  * **Purpose**: Appraise study quality for use in clinical guideline development.
  * **Strengths**: Emphasizes study design hierarchy and methodological rigor.
  * **Limitations**: More focused on clinical questions; less adaptable for broader research areas.


=== Comparative Summary Table ===

^ System  ^ Best For                        ^ Key Features                          ^ Complexity ^ Widely Used ^
| JBI     | Methodological quality           | Design-specific checklists             | Medium     | ✓✓          |
| GRADE   | Clinical guideline development   | Certainty + recommendation strength    | High       | ✓✓✓         |
| CASP    | Education and training           | User-friendly checklists               | Low        | ✓✓          |
| AMSTAR  | Systematic reviews               | 16-point validated tool                | Medium     | ✓✓          |
| SIGN    | Evidence for guidelines          | Evidence level + quality rating        | Medium     | ✓✓          |

====== Best Prompts for Critical Appraisal Systems for Scientific Evidence ======

=== 🔎 General Critical Appraisal ===
  * Critically appraise the following article using the most appropriate checklist based on its study design. Provide strengths, weaknesses, and a summary judgment on its reliability.  
    [Paste full abstract or article details here]

  * What critical appraisal tool should I use for this type of study? It's a [randomized controlled trial / systematic review / qualitative study / cohort study].

  * Explain step-by-step how to critically appraise a scientific article, and show how to apply that process to this paper:  
    [Paste citation or summary]

----

=== 📋 Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) ===
  * Use the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist to assess the methodological quality of the following [type of study]:  
    [Insert abstract or key information]

  * Generate a completed JBI critical appraisal checklist for a [cohort study / qualitative research / case series] using the following article:  
    [Insert article]

----

=== 🌍 GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) ===
  * Summarize the strength of the evidence in this article using GRADE criteria: risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision, and publication bias.  
    [Insert abstract or results section]

  * Using the GRADE framework, classify the quality of evidence and strength of recommendation for the following clinical practice guideline:  
    [Insert guideline or summary]

----

=== ✅ CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) ===
  * Apply the CASP checklist to this randomized controlled trial and summarize the results of each question.  
    [Insert study citation or abstract]

  * Give a teaching-friendly explanation of how to use the CASP checklist for evaluating a qualitative study. Include examples if possible.

----

=== 📊 AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) ===
  * Apply the AMSTAR 2 checklist to this systematic review and determine if it is high, moderate, low, or critically low quality.  
    [Insert systematic review details]

  * Explain each domain of the AMSTAR 2 tool in simple terms and show how it is applied in practice.

----

=== ⚖️ SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network) ===
  * Use the SIGN methodology to critically evaluate the following clinical trial for its inclusion in guideline development:  
    [Insert article summary or results]

  * Explain how SIGN levels of evidence differ from GRADE, and when each should be used.

----

=== 🧠 Meta Appraisal (Advanced) ===
  * Compare the appraisal of the same study using JBI, CASP, and GRADE frameworks. Identify key differences in focus, scoring, and conclusions.  
    [Insert article]

----

**Tip**: These prompts can be used directly in ChatGPT or GPT-4 to train students, conduct systematic reviews, or evaluate clinical articles in your daily practice.