Electronic Selective - "Evaluation of Veterinary Literature"

Evaluation of Journal Articles in Veterinary Medicine : A Five Step Approach

Beyond deciding which articles to pursue from a literature search print out, evaluation if individual articles is necessary. It is not always apparent by the title of an article whether it will be of use in a given situation, and whether the research it is based on is valid. A series of articles based on studies done at McMaster University offers a standard approach to critically appraising actual articles. Although this approach was developed for medical students, the similarities in veterinary medical and human medical literature makes it appropriate for use here.

The standard approach to evaluating an article is as follows:

1. Look at the title
2. Review the authors
3. Read the abstract
4. Consider the site
5. Consider your intended use

Title Evaluation
You should be able to determine if the article will be interesting or useful to you by reading the title. If it is of potential interest, go on to the Authors to continue your evaluation.

Using Authors to Evaluate Article
If the title sounded interesting or useful to you, read on to the list of author. Certain authors, who publish frequently on a particular topic, or are frequently cited by others, will become familiar. If the author is completely unknown to you, remember, everyone starts some where, perhaps reading on to the abstract might still be a good idea.

Using Abstracts to Evaluation Journal Articles
At this stage, use the abstract to determine if the results, if true would be helpful to you. You cannot really tell the quality of the science behind the results from the abstract, but if the conclusion of the article would be of interest to you, go on to consider the site where the work was done.

Evaluating the Site
In evaluating how useful the information contained in the article is to you, the site and situation must be similar enough to yours that you could implement a new method, or apply a new theory in an effective way. If the facilities, expertise or equipment are vastly different than your setting, do not read any further. On the other hand, if there are similarities, go on to evaluate your intended use of the information.

Considering Your Intended Use
If the title, authors, summary and site all pass your scrutiny, the next consideration should be what your intended use for the information is. The following are some intended uses to consider.

Intended Uses for Journal Articles

1. To evaluate a new diagnostic test.
   One of the main points to determine is whether there was an independent "blind" comparison of a "gold standard" of diagnosis against the new proposed diagnostic method. If there was, go on to read the methods section to determine if sound scientific method was used. If the scientific method is sound, go on to the results section to determine if the results are statistically significant.

2. To learn the prognosis and clinical course of a disease.
   There are six main points to consider when reading reports about the clinical course of a disease.

   • Were patients identified early and at a uniform point in the course of the disease?
   • How were the patients referred to the study? To some degree, this determines how "randomized" the population is that the report is based on.
   • Was complete follow up of all cases completed?
   • Were objective outcome criteria developed and useful?
   • Was the outcome assessment blind?
   • Was adjustment for extraneous prognostic factors carried out?

    

3. To determine the etiology of a disease.
   The main point to determine in assessing an article on the causation of a disease is the strength of the basic methodology used to study the causation. Were sound scientific methods used in collecting data?

4. To evaluate the efficacy of a new therapy.

   Validity: There are several points to consider when determining if a study on a new therapy is valid.

   • Was the assignment of patients to be treated really randomized?
   • Were both statistical and clinical significance considered?
   • Were all the patients who entered the study accounted for in the conclusion?

   Applicability

   • Were all clinically relevant outcomes reported?
   • Were the study patients recognizably similar to your own?
   • Is the therapeutic maneuver feasible in your own practice?

For additional information or help with Problem-Based Learning resources, please contact the Education Services Librarian.