READING THE LITERATURE

1
READING THE LITERATURE

• SUGGESTED OUTLINE FOR THE REVIEW OF JOURNAL
  ARTICLES

2
BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

• What were the objectives of the study? Was it
  intended to generate or test hypotheses?
• If a hypothesis testing study, was there a clear
  and specific statement of the hypothesis?
• What were the characteristics of the study
  population? Was this study population appropriate
  for the objectives of the study?

3
STUDY DESIGN

• What was the study design descriptive,
  case-control, cohort, cross-sectional, or
  experimental?
• How were the study groups chosen, and were
  selection criteria clearly defined?
• How were the comparison groups chosen?

4
STUDY DESIGN, cont.

• Were the study and comparison groups comparable
  in characteristics other than the study
  variables?
• What approaches were used to minimize confounding
  bias in the design phase?
• What were the response rates? Is there any reason
  to suspect selection bias?
• Is there likely to recall or reporting bias?

5
DEFINITION AND ASSESSMENT OF EXPOSURE AND OUTCOME
VARIABLES

• What were the exposure variables of interest?
  Were all such variables clearly defined?
• What were the outcome variables of interest? Were
  all such variables clearly defined?
• Could there be any interviewer bias?

6
DEFINITION AND ASSESSMENT OF EXPOSURE AND OUTCOME
VARIABLES, cont.

• Were objective measurements of exposure and
  outcome used? If so, were the measurement
  criteria clearly defined?
• Were the measurement and classification methods
  consistent for all the subjects?

7
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

• What methods were used to measure the association
  between exposure and disease? Were these
  analyses appropriate for the research design and
  questions of interest?
• Were the results statistically significant?
• Could there be any problems with multiple
  comparisons?

8
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS, cont.

• What methods were used to measure the stability
  of the association between exposure and outcome?
• Were the associations biologically meaningful?
• If a negative result was obtained, was the sample
  size adequate to detect a meaningful effect? Is
  there any discussion of statistical power?

9
STATISTICAL ANALYIS, cont.

• What bias might have been introduced into the
  findings by the approach to selection of
  subjects?
• Is there any evidence for bias by
  misclassification of outcome or exposure?
• Were potential confounding factors measured and
  controlled?

10
CONCLUSIONS

• Were the findings consistent with the results of
  other studies? Were alternative explanations
  considered by the authors?
• What conclusions were justified by the findings?
• Were the conclusions relevant to the study
  objectives?
• To what extent may the findings from the study be
  generalized to other populations?