Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Tool Assignment

Added on - 21 Jul 2020

  • 15

    pages

  • 3900

    words

  • 7

    views

  • 0

    downloads

Showing pages 1 to 4 of 15 pages
PART 3.1 APPRAISAL OF YOUR RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL (Please considerthe word limit for each question, 13 marks )Assessing the quality of the available evidence has also been a key focus this semester. Use theCASP tool for RCTs below to appraise the quality of your selected RCT.Section A: Are the results of the trial valid?Screening Questions1. Did the trial address a clearly focused issue?YesNoCan’t tellJustify your answer:(Max 50 words)Yes,population through collect patients randomly then allocate the group of patientsfor intervention.The organisation prepare a postal questionnaires for patients theoutcomeofexperiments is increase self care and adherences. In the self efficacy not anyimprovement. After thatcomparingthe result to standards to find out reasons.
HINT: An issue can be ‘focused’ In terms ofThe population studiedThe intervention givenThe comparator givenThe outcomes considered2. Was the assignment of patients to treatments randomised? (Max 50 Words)YesNoCan’t tellJustify your answer:Yes, the assessment of heart patients totreatments randomisedbecause there were randomly collect 382 heart patients then allocate197 persons of group for intervention.These experiments of allocationsequence is concealed in the formalsopatients did not had any knowledge about that.HINT: ConsiderHow was this carried out?Was the allocation sequence concealed from3. Were all of the patients who entered the trial properly accounted for at its conclusion?(Max 50 words)YesNoCan’t tellJustify your answer:These experiments are properly accounted thatwas not trial stoppedearly.There were divided heart patients in two groups after the experimentspatients analysedin the same group which they were randomised.HINT: ConsiderWas the trial stopped early?Were patients analysed in the groups to which they were randomised?4. Were patients, health workers and study personnel ‘blind’ to treatment? (Max 50 words)YesNoCan’t tell
Justify your answer:Yes, Heartpatients, health workers and study personnel were blind totreatmentbecause through the organisation provide various treatments as experiments so theycould be blindly trust on that.Because theydid not have any information and knowledgeabout new interventions.HINT: Think aboutPatients?Health workers?Study personnel?5. Were the groups similar at the start of the trial? (Max 50 words)YesNoCan’t tellJustify your answer:Yes, there were group of personsare similar at the starting pointof trial is collected 382persons in which 137 persons are allocated by intervention.Age of these personsapproximately 75and more than. In which 59% are male and 64%were lived with a partner.HINT: Look atOther factors that might affect the outcome such as age,sex, social classresearchers and patients?6. Aside from the experimental intervention were the groups treated equally? (Max 50words)YesNoCan’t tellJustify your answer:Yes, During the experiment of intervention so there wereequally treat to all persons bythe health organisation.By which there isnot create bias naturewith patients and they will get moresatisfaction by organisation's employees in the effective manner.
Section B: What are the results?7. How large was the treatment effect? (Max 150 words)Justify your answer:Experiment result effects were measured byCritical Appraisal skill Programmes.There isalso use tele- monitoring systems to asses the symptoms of patients by which nurses areeasy to know and identify them.Its help to take effective decision and determine the actual effects of variousexperiments on heart patients.There is basis differences in self care is (p=0.001) and selfefficacy is (p=0.024) its increase 0.9 on 15 point of scale and self care increased 1.5 on10 point of scale this improvement only applied on experimental group.But those persons are taking usual care so their is not having any improvements.In theself efficacy having no major difference after 3 and 6 months. Fluid intake is 0.019 in 3months and 0.086 in 12 months. Adherence of patients in 3 month is 0.023 and in 12month is 0.037.HINT: ConsiderWhat outcomes were measured?Is the primary outcome clearly specified?What results were found for each outcome?8. How precise was the estimate of the treatment effect? (Max 100 words)Justify your answer:Treatment effect estimated by tele monitoring devices there is also use Critical Appraisalskill Programmes.Researcher are most confident for experiments.By these intervention self care become (p= 0.024) and self efficacy is (p= 0.024), afterthe intervention self care increased 1.5 is increased on 10 point of scale and in selfefficacy having no any major differences. Also fluid intake in 3 month is 0.019 it becomein 12 months is 0.086. and adherence of patients is 0.023 in 3 months and in 12 monthsit become 0.037.HINT: ConsiderWhat are the confidence limits?Section C: Will the results help locally?
desklib-logo
You’re reading a preview
card-image

To View Complete Document

Become a Desklib Library Member.
Subscribe to our plans

Download This Document