A practitioner's guide to developing critical appraisal skills: reviews of research

Ian Needleman (Lead / Corresponding author), Jan Clarkson, Helen Worthington

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    6 Citations (Scopus)


    Background and overview. This article describes the different types of reviews of research that are available in the literature: systematic reviews and traditional reviews. Systematic reviews have become the reference standard for evidence to inform clinical practice. In this article, the authors set out guidance on appraising the quality and relevance of systematic reviews to help readers make decisions about their clinical practice.
    Conclusions and practical implications. Systematic reviews are of variable quality, although evaluations of reviews by the Cochrane Collaboration generally are of the highest quality. An assessment tool described in this article appears currently to be the most useful tool to guide clinicians to assess systematic reviews and therefore to decide whether the evidence is appropriate to change practice.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)527-30
    Number of pages4
    JournalJournal of the American Dental Association
    Issue number5
    Publication statusPublished - May 2013


    • Checklist
    • Dental Research
    • Dentist's Practice Patterns
    • Evidence-Based Dentistry
    • Humans
    • Information Literacy
    • Meta-Analysis as Topic
    • Research Design
    • Review Literature as Topic


    Dive into the research topics of 'A practitioner's guide to developing critical appraisal skills: reviews of research'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this