Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 149 views

    CASP Checklist: Randomised Controlled Trial How To Use This Appraisal Tool

    Uploaded by

    chindy hastuti

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    CASP Checklist: Randomised Controlled Trial How To Use This Appraisal Tool

    Uploaded by

    chindy hastuti
    149 views5 pages

    Original Title

    CASP.pdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    149 views5 pages

    CASP Checklist: Randomised Controlled Trial How To Use This Appraisal Tool

    Uploaded by

    chindy hastuti

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 5

    CASP Checklist: 11 questions to help you make sense of a Randomised Controlled Trial

    How to use this appraisal tool: Three broad issues need to be considered when appraising a
    trial:

    Are the results of the study valid? (Section A)


    What are the results? (Section B)
    Will the results help locally? (Section C)

    The 11 questions on the following pages are designed to help you think about these issues
    systematically. The first three questions are screening questions and can be answered
    quickly. If the answer to both is “yes”, it is worth proceeding with the remaining questions.
    There is some degree of overlap between the questions, you are asked to record a “yes”,
    “no” or “can’t tell” to most of the questions. A number of italicised prompts are given after
    each question. These are designed to remind you why the question is important. Record your
    reasons for your answers in the spaces provided.

    About: These checklists were designed to be used as educational pedagogic tools, as part of a
    workshop setting, therefore we do not suggest a scoring system. The core CASP checklists
    (randomised controlled trial & systematic review) were based on JAMA 'Users’ guides to the
    medical literature 1994 (adapted from Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, and Cook DJ), and piloted with
    health care practitioners.
    For each new checklist, a group of experts were assembled to develop and pilot the checklist
    and the workshop format with which it would be used. Over the years overall adjustments
    have been made to the format, but a recent survey of checklist users reiterated that the basic
    format continues to be useful and appropriate.
    Referencing: we recommend using the Harvard style citation, i.e.: Critical Appraisal Skills
    Programme (2018). CASP (insert name of checklist i.e. Randomised Controlled Trial) Checklist.
    [online] Available at: URL. Accessed: Date Accessed.

    ©CASP this work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution – Non-Commercial-
    Share A like. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-
    sa/3.0/ www.casp-uk.net

    Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) part of Oxford Centre for Triple Value Healthcare Ltd www.casp-uk.net
    Paper for appraisal and reference:
    Section A: Are the results of the trial valid?

    1. Did the trial address a clearly Yes ✔ HINT: An issue can be ‘focused’ In terms of
    focused issue? • the population studied
    Can’t Tell • the intervention given
    • the comparator given
    No
    • the outcomes considered

    Comments:

    2. Was the assignment of Yes HINT: Consider


    patients to treatments • how this was carried out
    randomised? Can’t Tell • was the allocation sequence concealed
    from researchers and patients
    No
    ✔

    Comments:

    3. Were all of the patients Yes HINT: Consider


    ✔
    who entered the trial • was the trial stopped early
    properly accounted for at Can’t Tell • were patients analysed in the groups to
    its conclusion? which they were randomised
    No

    Comments:

    Is it worth continuing?

    2
    4. Were patients, health Yes
    workers and study personnel
    ‘blind’ to treatment? Can’t Tell ✔

    No

    Comments:

    5. Were the groups similar at Yes HINT: Consider


    ✔
    the start of the trial • other factors that might affect the
    Can’t Tell outcome, such as; age, sex, social class

    No

    Comments: Jumlah sampel sebanyak 66 orang (33 responden dilakukan terapi back massage dan
    akupresur) yang diperoleh dengan menggunakan teknik non probability sampling jenis
    consecutive
    sampling.

    6. Aside from the experimental Yes


    intervention, were the groups
    treated equally?
    Can’t Tell

    No
    ✔

    Comments:
    Penelitian menggunakan 2 kelompok pre test dan post test

    Section B: What are the results?

    3
    7. How large was the treatment effect? HINT: Consider
    • what outcomes were
    measured
    • Is the primary outcome clearly
    specified
    • what results were found for
    each outcome

    Comments:
    Hasil penelitian menunjukkan tidak terdapat perbedaan yang signi¿ kan
    hasil skor kualitas tidur di antara therapy back massage dan akupresur
    dengan nilai p=0.575(>0.001). Penelitian ini menunjukkan ada peningkatan
    kualitas tidur pasien hemodialisa setelah dilakukan intervensi.

    8. How precise was the estimate of the treatment HINT: Consider


    effect? • what are the confidence limits

    Comments: Peneliti sudah tepat dengan menggunakan teknik pre test dan post test
    karena hasil yang didapatkan terlihat beda hasilnya.

    Section C: Will the results help locally?

    9. Can the results be applied to Yes HINT: Consider whether


    ✔
    the local population, or in • the patients covered by the trial are
    your context? Can’t Tell similar enough to the patients to whom
    you will apply this
    No • how they differ

    Comments:

    10. Were all clinically important Yes HINT: Consider whether


    outcomes considered? • there is other information you would
    Can’t Tell like to have seen
    • if not, does this affect the decision
    No
    ✔

    Comments:

    4
    11. Are the benefits worth the Yes ✔
    HINT: Consider
    harms and costs? • even if this is not addressed by the
    Can’t Tell trial, what do you think?

    No

    Comments: terapi ini tidak membahayakan selagi dilakukan dengan benar dan oleh
    ang betul-betul bisa melakukannya baik tenaga kesehatan ataupun
    memandirikan keluarga.

    You might also like