- Aims of study stated?
- Does study match up to the aims?
- Design of study appropriate?
- Adequate size?
- Truly random?
- Truly blind?
- Comparable between treatment
- and control groups?
- Unchanged during study?
- Timespan appropriate?
- Questionnaires avoid bias or ambiguity?
- Outcome measures "hard" or "soft"?
- Response rate adequate to avoid bias?
- Follow-up adequate?
- Extraneous bias allowed for?
- "Normal" distribution of data?
- Confidence intervals (5% or 1%)
- Reliability/validity tested?
- Associations defined?
- Data interpreted objectively?
- Rational speculation of results?
- Clinical significance mentioned?
- Presentation clear?
- Results valid?
Style matters; BMJ 1990;300:38-40
Jewell D; Reading scientific articles; Practitioner 232; 720-25
See also evidence-based medicine