{"id":4,"date":"2021-01-18T15:55:53","date_gmt":"2021-01-18T20:55:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/rickyturgeon\/2021\/01\/18\/introduction\/"},"modified":"2022-01-12T22:16:51","modified_gmt":"2022-01-13T03:16:51","slug":"introduction","status":"publish","type":"front-matter","link":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/rickyturgeon\/front-matter\/introduction\/","title":{"raw":"Introduction","rendered":"Introduction"},"content":{"raw":"

Introduction<\/strong><\/h2>\r\nWelcome to NERDCAT: A Clinician's Guide to Appraising [pb_glossary id=\"704\"]Randomized Controlled Trials[\/pb_glossary] and [pb_glossary id=\"1099\"]Systematic Reviews[\/pb_glossary]\/[pb_glossary id=\"1101\"]Meta-Analyses[\/pb_glossary]. Led by Dr. Ricky Turgeon<\/a>, NERDCAT was designed to help clinicians make sense of clinical research and has two core components: (1) The NERDCAT appraisal checklists, which facilitate the systematic appraisal of clinical studies; and (2) detailed guidance on how to address the NERDCAT appraisal checklist questions, along with rationales, supporting empiric evidence where available, and examples. While tools like CONSORT<\/a> and PRISMA<\/a> are aimed at researchers to facilitate adequate reporting of key details of their [pb_glossary id=\"704\"]randomized controlled trials[\/pb_glossary] and [pb_glossary id=\"1099\"]systematic reviews[\/pb_glossary], NERDCAT appraisal checklists are written \"for clinicians, by clinicians\" explicitly for the purpose of appraising clinical evidence and applying it to practice.\r\n\r\nNERDCAT is organized into 3 chapters (Generalizability<\/a>, Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs)<\/a>, and Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses)<\/a>, an appendix of core statistical concepts (Appendix: Fundamental Statistics<\/a>), and a comprehensive glossary of key terms<\/a>. The [pb_glossary id=\"1653\"]Generalizability[\/pb_glossary] chapter is applicable to any clinical study type, including [pb_glossary id=\"704\"]RCTs[\/pb_glossary] and [pb_glossary id=\"1099\"]systematic reviews[\/pb_glossary]\/[pb_glossary id=\"1101\"]meta-analyses[\/pb_glossary]. NERDCAT can be read front-to-back or perused as a reference guide when appraising a study. Since the appendix<\/a> describes the foundational statistical concepts necessary to understand the rest of the book, it is likely the best starting point for those unsure where to begin.\r\n\r\nNERDCAT is structured around a core framework for appraising clinical studies adapted from the Users' Guides to the Medical Literature (Guyatt G et al.<\/a>), which centers around 3 key questions:\r\n
    \r\n \t
  1. Generalizability:<\/strong> Who was studied and how do these results apply to my patients?<\/li>\r\n \t
  2. Internal validity:<\/strong> How serious is the risk of [pb_glossary id=\"193\"]bias[\/pb_glossary] and how might it impact the results?<\/li>\r\n \t
  3. What are the results?:<\/strong> What are the estimates of benefits & harms, how precise are those estimates, and are observed differences clinically important?<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\nThe NERDCAT checklists are available at the following Google Doc links:\r\n