Reference no: EM132416659

Assignment -

1. Table 1 Cross-sectional study: Prevalence of diabetes, pre-diabetes and associated risk factors: second National Diabetes Survey of Pakistan (NDSP), 2016-2017 (Basit A et al, 2017)

Critical appraisal questions -

Were the criteria for inclusion in the sample clearly defined?

Were the study subjects and the setting described in detail?

Was the exposure measured in a valid and reliable way?

Were objective, standard criteria used for measurement of the condition?

Were confounding factors identified?

Were strategies to deal with confounding factors stated?

Were the outcomes measured in a valid and reliable way?

Was appropriate statistical analysis used?

2. Table 2 Case control study: A case-control study of risk of leukaemia in relation to mobile phone use. (Cooke et al, 2010)

Critical appraisal questions -

Did the study address a clearly focused issue?

Did the authors use an appropriate method to answer their question?

Were the cases recruited in an acceptable way?

Was the exposure accurately measured to minimise bias?

Aside from the experimental intervention, were the groups treated equally?

Have the authors taken account of the potential confounding factors in the design and/or in their analysis?

3. Table 3 Cohort study: A Prospective Cohort Study of Coffee Consumption and Risk of Endometrial Cancer over a 26-year of Follow-Up (Je Y et al, 2011)

Critical appraisal questions -

Did the study address a clearly focused issue?

Was the cohort recruited in an acceptable way?

Was the exposure accurately measured to minimise bias?

Was the outcome accurately measured to minimise bias?

Have the authors identified all important confounding factors?

Have they taken account of the confounding factors in the design and/or analysis?

Was the follow up of subjects complete enough?

Was the follow up of subjects long enough?

4. Table 4 Randomised controlled trial: (Insert the title of the paper you are appraising)

Critical appraisal questions -

Did the trial address a clearly focused issue?

Was the assignment of patients to treatments randomised?

Were all of the patients who entered the trial properly accounted for at its conclusion?

Were patients, health workers and study personnel 'blind' to treatment?

Were the groups similar at the start of the trial?

Aside from the experimental intervention, were the groups treated equally?