Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 18 views

    Cohort Worksheet

    Uploaded by

    Carlos Andres
    This document provides a worksheet for critically appraising a cohort study. It lists questions to consider regarding the validity of the study results, potential biases, how the study was conducted, and whether the results can be applied to patient care. Key areas examined include how the exposed and non-exposed cohorts were selected and compared, how exposures and outcomes were measured, whether important confounders were adjusted for, and the strengths and limitations of the study. The worksheet is intended to help systematically evaluate a cohort study design.

    Copyright:

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

    Cohort Worksheet

    Uploaded by

    Carlos Andres
    18 views4 pages
    This document provides a worksheet for critically appraising a cohort study. It lists questions to consider regarding the validity of the study results, potential biases, how the study was conducted, and whether the results can be applied to patient care. Key areas examined include how the exposed and non-exposed cohorts were selected and compared, how exposures and outcomes were measured, whether important confounders were adjusted for, and the strengths and limitations of the study. The worksheet is intended to help systematically evaluate a cohort study design.

    Original Description:

    fichas de cohortes

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document provides a worksheet for critically appraising a cohort study. It lists questions to consider regarding the validity of the study results, potential biases, how the study was conducted, and whether the results can be applied to patient care. Key areas examined include how the exposed and non-exposed cohorts were selected and compared, how exposures and outcomes were measured, whether important confounders were adjusted for, and the strengths and limitations of the study. The worksheet is intended to help systematically evaluate a cohort study design.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    18 views4 pages

    Cohort Worksheet

    Uploaded by

    Carlos Andres
    This document provides a worksheet for critically appraising a cohort study. It lists questions to consider regarding the validity of the study results, potential biases, how the study was conducted, and whether the results can be applied to patient care. Key areas examined include how the exposed and non-exposed cohorts were selected and compared, how exposures and outcomes were measured, whether important confounders were adjusted for, and the strengths and limitations of the study. The worksheet is intended to help systematically evaluate a cohort study design.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 4

    CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF A COHORT STUDY

    COHORT WORKSHEET

    Citation:

    Are the results valid?


    1. Was there a clearly defined, focused
    research question? What was the study
    question?

    2. How was the exposed cohort selected?


    Was there a well defined selection
    procedure for inclusion into the cohort?
    What proportion of eligible subjects was
    actually included?

    3. How was the non exposed cohort


    selected? Was this cohort drawn from the
    same source population as the exposed
    cohort? Was there a well defined selection
    procedure for inclusion into the cohort?
    What proportion of eligible subjects was
    actually included?

    4. How were the main exposures


    ascertained? Were the exposures clear,
    specific and measurable? Any likelihood of
    exposure misclassification?

    5. Was the cohort free of the disease


    (outcome) at the start of follow-up? Were
    only people at risk of the outcome included?

    6. Was duration of follow-up adequate (i.e.


    long enough for main outcomes to occur)?

    7. Was follow-up complete? Were efforts


    made to limit the loss to follow-up? What
    Source: Adapted from 1) Newcastle Ottawa Scale [http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.htm); 2) 1
    Reader’s Guide to Critical Appraisal of Cohort Studies. BMJ 2005 (3 article series); 3) Grimes et al. Lancet
    2002;359:341-45; and 4) Guyatt & Rennie. Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature, AMA Press, 2002.
    Compiled by Madhu Pai [[email protected]]
    CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF A COHORT STUDY
    COHORT WORKSHEET

    was the rate of attrition and was loss to


    follow-up similar in the exposed and non
    exposed cohorts?

    8. What were the primary and secondary


    outcomes of the study? How well were the
    outcomes measured? Was the outcome
    clear, specific and measurable? Were
    surrogate outcomes used?

    9. Were outcomes measures similarly in


    exposed and non exposed cohorts? Was
    outcome ascertainment influenced by
    knowledge of the exposure status (i.e. lack
    of blinding)?

    10. How comparable were the exposed and


    non-exposed cohorts? Have the authors
    identified all potentially important
    confounders? Is there information on how
    the potential confounders are distributed
    between the comparison groups? What
    confounders were adjusted for and was the
    adjustment adequate? Is residual
    confounding a concern?

    Any other potential biases in this study?

    Potential for selection bias?

    Potential for information bias?

    Source: Adapted from 1) Newcastle Ottawa Scale [http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.htm); 2) 2


    Reader’s Guide to Critical Appraisal of Cohort Studies. BMJ 2005 (3 article series); 3) Grimes et al. Lancet
    2002;359:341-45; and 4) Guyatt & Rennie. Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature, AMA Press, 2002.
    Compiled by Madhu Pai [[email protected]]
    CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF A COHORT STUDY
    COHORT WORKSHEET

    Potential for confounding?

    Was there a clear rationale for the sample


    size estimation?

    Are the analytic strategies clearly


    described? Were the data analytic methods
    appropriate for the research question and
    study design?

    What are the results?

    What are the study results?

    1. How strong was the association


    between exposure and outcome (e.g. rate
    ratio or hazard ratio or odds ratio)?

    2. How precise was the estimate of the


    association (i.e. confidence intervals
    around the point estimates or p-values)?

    Can you apply the results to patient care?

    1. Were the study participants similar to the


    patient in your practice?

    Source: Adapted from 1) Newcastle Ottawa Scale [http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.htm); 2) 3


    Reader’s Guide to Critical Appraisal of Cohort Studies. BMJ 2005 (3 article series); 3) Grimes et al. Lancet
    2002;359:341-45; and 4) Guyatt & Rennie. Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature, AMA Press, 2002.
    Compiled by Madhu Pai [[email protected]]
    CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF A COHORT STUDY
    COHORT WORKSHEET

    -Does your patient match the study


    inclusion criteria?

    -If not, are there compelling reasons why


    the results should not apply to your
    patient?

    2. Were all clinically important outcomes


    considered?

    3. Do the results of this study fit with other


    available evidence?

    In summary:
    What are the major strengths of this study?

    What are the major limitations of this study?

    Are there any major ethical concerns with this study?

    Source: Adapted from 1) Newcastle Ottawa Scale [http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.htm); 2) 4


    Reader’s Guide to Critical Appraisal of Cohort Studies. BMJ 2005 (3 article series); 3) Grimes et al. Lancet
    2002;359:341-45; and 4) Guyatt & Rennie. Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature, AMA Press, 2002.
    Compiled by Madhu Pai [[email protected]]

    You might also like