CASP Case Control Checklist 14.10.10

8/10/2019 CASP Case Control Checklist 14.10.10

1/5

CRITICAL APPAISAL

Judul jurnal: Clinical Study of Psoriasis Occuring Over the Age of 60 years: is Elderly-Onset

Psoriasis a Distinct suty!e"

Penulis: #yuc$ #oon %&on' (D' )n #o %&on' (D' and Jai )l *oun' (D' PhD

Penerit dan +ahun +erit: )nternational Journal of Der,atology' 0.

Jenis !enelitian:Retrospective Study


2/5

#ala,an .

#ala,an .

Yes Can't tell No

A/ Are the results of the study valid?

S cr e e n i n g u e s t io n s

! "id the study address a clearly focused issue?HINT: A question can be focused in terms of?

the population studied

the risk factors studied

hether the study tried to detect a beneficial or

harmful effect?

# "id the authors use an a$$ro$riate %ethod to

ans&er their uestion?

HINT: !onsider

is a case control study a n appropriate ay ofanserin" the question under the

circumstances?#is the outcome rare or

harmful?$

did it address the study question?

Yes Can't tell No

Is it worth continuing?

Detail ed Questi ons

( )ere the cases recruited in an acce$ta*le &ay?

HINT: %e are lookin" for selection bias hichmi"ht compromise validity of

thefindin"s:

Are the cases defined precisely?

%ere the cases representative of a defined

population #"eo"raphically and&or temporally$?

%as there an established reliable s y s te mfor

selectin" all the cases? Are they incident or prevalent?

Is there somethin" special about the cases?

Is the time frame of the study relevant to

disease&e'posure?

%as there a sufficient number of cases selected?

%as there a poer calculation?

Yes Can't tell No

#ala,an . dan

Case Control chec$list/.1.01.0


3/5

+ )ere the controls selected in an acce$ta*le &ay?

HINT: %e are lookin" for selection bias hich mi"ht

compromise the "eneralisability of thefindin"s:

%ere the controls representative of a defined

population #"eo"raphically and&or temporally$?

%as there somethin" special about the controls?

%as the non(response hi"h? !ould non(respondents be different in any ay?

Are they matched) population based or randomly

selected?

%as there a sufficient number of controls

selected?

Yes Can't tell No

#ala,an . dan

,- )as the e.$osure accurately %easured to

%ini%ise *ias?

#)2+: 3e are loo$ing for ,easure,ent' recall or

classification ias:

%as the e'posure clearly defined and accuratelymeasured?

*id the authors use sub+ective or ob+ective

measurements?

*o the measures truly reflect hat they aresupposed to measure? #have they beenvalidated?$

%ere the measurement methods similar in the

cases and controls?

*id the study incorporate blindin" here

feasible?

Is the temporal relation correct? #does the

e'posure of interest precede the outcome?$

Yes Can't tell No

#ala,an

A- )hat confounding factors have the

authors accounted for?

List the ones you thin0 %ight *e i%$ortant1 that

the author %issed-4genetic' environ,ental and socio-econo,ic5

2- 3ave the authors ta0en account of the $otential

confounding factors in the design and/or in their

analysis?

#)2+:

,ook for restriction in desi"n) and techniques e-"-

modellin") stratified() re"ression() or sensitivity

analysis to correct) control or ad+ustfor

confoundin"factors

Yes Can't tell No

#ala,an 6

Yes Can't tell No

#ala,an 6



4/5

4- )hat are the results of this study?

!.NSI*/R:

%hat are the bottom line results?

Is the analysis appropriate to the desi"n?

Ho stron" is the association beteen e'posure

and outcome #look at the odds ratio$?

Are the results ad+usted for confoundin" and

mi"ht confoundin" still e'plain the association? Has ad+ustment made a bi" difference to the .R?

Di $eterangan

B/ W hat are the resul ts?

5 3o& $recise are the results?

3o& $recise is the esti%ate of ris0?

!.NSI*/R:

Si0e of the 1(value

Si0e of the confidence intervals Have the authors considered all the important

variables?

Ho as the effect of sub+ects refusin" to

participate evaluated?

Di $eterangan#ala,an '' dan 7

6- "o you *elieve the results?

!.NSI*/R:

2i" effect is hard to i"nore3

!an it be due to chance) bias or confoundin"?

Are the desi"n and methods of this study

sufficiently flaed to make the resultsunreliable?

!onsider 2radford Hills criteria #e-"- time

sequence) dose(response "radient) stren"th)

biolo"ical plausibility$

Yes No



5/5

C/ W ill the resul ts help m e locall y?

!7- Can the results *e a$$lied to the local $o$ulation?

HINT: !onsider hether

The sub+ects covered in the study could be

sufficiently different from your population to

cause concern

4our local settin" is likely to differ much

from that of the study

!an you quantify the local benefits and

harms?

Yes Can't tell No

!!- "o the results of this study fit &ith other availa*le

evidence?

HINT: !onsider all the available evidence from R!Ts)

systematic revies) cohort studies and case(controlstudies as ell for consistency-

Yes Can't tell No

#ala,an 7 dan 6

8ne o*servational study rarely $rovides sufficiently ro*ust evidence to

reco%%end changes to clinical $ractice or &ithin health $olicy decision %a0ing-

3o&ever1 for certain uestions o*servational studies $rovide the only evidence-

Reco%%endations fro% o*servational studies are al&ays stronger &hen

su$$orted

*y other evidence-


Documents

CASP Case Control Checklist 14.10.10