Skip to main content
It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.

Physical Therapy Research

Rating Scales

Rating System for the Hierarchy of Evidence: Quantitative Questions

Level I: Evidence from a systematic review of all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCT's), or evidence-based clinical practice guidelines based on systematic reviews of RCT's 

Level II: Evidence obtained from at least one well-designed Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) 

Level III: Evidence obtained from well-designed controlled trials without randomization, quasi-experimental 

Level IV: Evidence from well-designed case-control and cohort studies 

Level V: Evidence from systematic reviews of descriptive and qualitative studies 

Level VI: Evidence from a single descriptive or qualitative study 

Level VII: Evidence from the opinion of authorities and/or reports of expert committees

Above information from "Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: a guide to best practice" by Bernadette M. Melnyk and Ellen Fineout-Overholt. 2005, page 10.

Additional information can be found at: www.tnaonline.org/Media/pdf/present/conv-10-l-thompson.pdf

Evidence-based models use a process for framing a question, locating, assessing, evaluating, and repeating as needed. PICO (T) elements include:

  • Problem/Patient/Population
  • Intervention/Indicator 
  • Comparison 
  • Outcome
  • (optional) Time element or Type of Study

Image result for sackett's level of evidence

Source: https://www.slideshare.net/AsirJohnSamuel/treadmill-training-in-children-by-dr-asir-john-samuel-pt

Checklist for Analyzing a Research Article

TITLE

  • Is it clear and concise?
  • Does it promise no more than the study can provide?

INTRODUCTION

1. The Problem

  • It is clearly stated?
  • Is it properly defined?
  • Is its significance recognized?
  • Are specific questions raised; hypotheses clearly stated?
  • Are assumptions and limitations stated?
  • Are important terms defined?

2. Review of Related Literature

  • Is it adequately covered?
  • Are important findings noted?
  • Is it well organized?
  • Is an effective summary provided?

METHODOLOGY: Procedures Used

  • Is the research design described in detail?
  • Is it adequate?
  • Are the samples described?
  • Are relevant variables recognized?
  • Are appropriate controls provided?
  • Are data-gathering instruments appropriate?
  • Are validity and reliability established?
  • Is the statistical treatment appropriate?

RESULTS: Data Analysis

  • Is appropriate use made of tables and figures?
  • Is the textual discussion clear and concise?
  • Is the analysis of data relationships logical and perceptive?
  • Is the statistical analysis accurately interpreted?

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Summary and Conclusions

  • Is the problem restated?
  • Are the procedures and findings concisely presented?
  • Is the analysis objective?
  • Are the findings and conclusions justified by the data presented and analyzed?

From: http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/pe/exs514web/How2Evalarticles.htm

Visit us on Facebook

Visit us on Twitter

 Rockhurst University Library · 1100 Rockhurst Road · Kansas City, MO 64110 · 816-501-4116