Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 26 views

    Checklist For Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses-Dikonversi

    Uploaded by

    khao

    Copyright:

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

    Checklist For Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses-Dikonversi

    Uploaded by

    khao
    26 views3 pages

    Original Title

    Checklist_for_Systematic_Reviews_and_Research_Syntheses-dikonversi

    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
    26 views3 pages

    Checklist For Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses-Dikonversi

    Uploaded by

    khao

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 3

    CHECKLIST FOR SYSTEMATIC

    REVIEWS AND RESEARCH


    SYNTHESES
    Critical Appraisal tools for use in JBI Systematic Reviews
    INTRODUCTION
    JBI is an international research organisation based in the Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences at the
    University of Adelaide, South Australia. JBI develops and delivers unique evidence-based information,
    software, education and training designed to improve healthcare practice and health outcomes.With over
    70Collaborating Entities, servicing over 90 countries, JBI is a recognised global leader in evidence-based
    healthcare.

    JBI Systematic Reviews


    The core of evidence synthesis is the systematic review of literature of a particular intervention, condition
    or issue. The systematic review is essentially an analysis of the available literature (that is, evidence) and a
    judgment of the effectiveness or otherwise of a practice, involving a series of complex steps. JBI takes a
    particular view on what counts as evidence and the methods utilised to synthesise those different types of
    evidence. In line with this broader view of evidence, JBI has developed theories, methodologies and
    rigorous processes for the critical appraisal and synthesis of these diverse forms of evidence in order to aid
    in clinical decision-making in healthcare. There now exists JBI guidance for conducting reviews of
    effectiveness research, qualitative research, prevalence/incidence, etiology/risk, economic evaluations,
    text/opinion, diagnostic test accuracy, mixed-methods, umbrella reviews and scoping reviews. Further
    information regarding JBI systematic reviews can be found in the JBI Evidence Synthesis Manual.

    JBI Critical Appraisal Tools


    All systematic reviews incorporate a process of critique or appraisal of the research evidence. The purpose
    of this appraisal is to assess the methodological quality of a study and to determine the extent to which a
    study has addressed the possibility of bias in its design, conduct and analysis. All papers selected for
    inclusion in the systematic review (that is – those that meet the inclusion criteria described in the protocol)
    need to be subjected to rigorous appraisal by two critical appraisers. The results of this appraisal can then
    be used to inform synthesis and interpretation of the results of the study. JBI Critical appraisal tools have
    been developed by the JBI and collaborators and approved by the JBI Scientific Committee following
    extensive peer review. Although designed for use in systematic reviews, JBI critical appraisal tools can also
    be used when creating Critically Appraised Topics (CAT), in journal clubs and as an educational tool.

    © JBI, 2020. All rights reserved.JBI grants use Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses -2
    of thesetools for research purposesonly.
    All other enquiriesshould be sent to
    [email protected].
    JBI CRITICAL APPRAISAL CHECKLIST FOR
    SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS AND RESEARCH SYNTHESES

    Reviewer: ERIKA DYAH P Date : 19 November 2021


    Author : Sarah N Stabler1, Aaron M Tejani2, Fong Huynh3, Claire Fowkes4
    Year : 2012
    Record Number: 01
    Not
    Yes No Unclear
    applicable

    1. Is the review question clearly and explicitly stated?


    □V □ □ □
    2. Were the inclusion criteria appropriate for the review
    question? □ V □ □ □
    3. Was the search strategy appropriate?
    □V □ □ □
    4. Were the sources and resources used to search for
    studies adequate? □V □ □ □
    5. Were the criteria for appraising studies appropriate?
    □V □ □ □
    6. Was critical appraisal conducted by two or more
    reviewers independently? □ V □ □ □
    7. Were there methods to minimize errors in data
    extraction? □ V □ □ □
    8. Were the methods used to combine studies appropriate?
    □V □ □ □
    9. Was the likelihood of publication bias assessed?
    □VV □ □ □
    10. Were recommendations for policy and/or practice
    supported by the reported data? □V □ □ □
    11. Were the specific directives for new research
    appropriate? □V □ □ □
    Overall appraisal: Include □V Exclude □ Seek further info □
    Comments (Including reason for exclusion)

    ________________________________________________________________________________________________
    ________________________________________________________________________________________________
    ________________________________________________________________________________________________

    © JBI, 2020. All rights reserved.JBI grants use Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses -3
    of thesetools for research purposesonly.
    All other enquiriesshould be sent to
    [email protected].

    You might also like