The Pedro Scale - Essay Example

? Proquest is the database I am finding all my randomized control trials. I am going to rate six articles using the Pedro Rating Scale. The Pedro scale consists of 11 questions. The questions are criteria that must be achieved that provide a total of 10 if all criteria are met. There is a Pedro Database already in existence, however I am going to use the Pedro Scale for the six articles found on Proquest instead. The overall rating is from 0 - 10 where 9 - 10 = excellent; 6 - 8 = good; 4-5 = fair; and < 4 = poor. Evidence level measures also exist where 1b = good quality randomized controlled trial; 2b = poor quality randomized controlled trial. Usually if a Pedro rating is not incorporated in the article, then a low score will be provided on the scale. I will make exceptions on some of the articles below. Article 1: The Efficacy of Nutrition and Lifestyle Approaches in the Treatment of Depression This article's treatment plan is somewhat believable. The criteria and eligibility of who is in this study is clear to some extent but not clear enough. This study uses random allocation to measure its results. There is no mention that it is a random study nor any indication is given of whether the participants are from different backgrounds or not (1 point). This study conceals allocation by not providing any detailed information on the participants (1 + 1 = 2 points). There is a comparability of the groups at baseline and the study is blind because we have an age range and a control vs noncontrol group (1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 4 points). The therapists and assessors component is not fully satisfied because there is no mention of therapist and their techniques included along with no indication of a well established person in charge of administering the treatment. It is a random list of items to deal with finding an alternative to medication for depression. The only followup here is that the participants have no way of curing depression. That would be considered enough of a followup because participants of the study are aware that this is not a cure but rather a possible solution to depression (5 points). In other words, little mention as to a followup study has been recorded. This study does not use enough statistical analysis to provide evidence of achieving its results. Three confident interval scores were used and that is not enough to prove that nutrition and lifestyle changes help. There is mention of point estimates on the mean however this does not provide enough evidence that the items they suggest help to benefit depression. This article is granted a Pedro rating of 5 which means it is fair. I could have gone to 4 or 6 but I think 5 is more of a proper score. Any article with a score of 6 or above would be considered a worthy study. Overall this article gets a 2b rating. Article 2: Aspirin Use and Lung, Colon, and Breast Cancer: Incidence in a prospective study Random allocation and the concealment of this allocation is clear. We know who is in the study and we also know that it remains confidential. The study is believable and states clear demographics. Also the identities of the participants is secure (1 + 1 + 1 = 3 points). The comparision of groups at baseline is illustrated throughout the research because we are comparing those who take aspirin and get various types of cancer and those who do not. There is a follow up of results with a 12.4 year period (2 + 3 = 5 points). This article provides several charts and provides a lot of analysis on those who use aspirin and whether they are less likely to get cancer. They provide a lot of substantial evidence and use appropriate measures to establish a list of results. The background on how they use these measures is also quite thoroughly investigated (5 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 8 points). Overall, this article has a Pedro rating of 8 which means that it is good in the presentation of experimental methods and it has a clear demonstration of its demographics. It is also easily conceivable that this research would have these results judging only on the presentation and the research methods of this article. Overall, this article gets a 1b rating. Article 3: Congenital Varicella syndrome: the evidence for secondary prevention with Varicella-Zoster Immune Globulin This article is poor on the Pedro rating scale because it is a rare disease that is not getting enough randomized controlled trial studies done on it. It has few demographics and there is little known about the disease. It would also be unethical to grant a therapist with this study because people without the disease should not be administered treatment for it. Most of the results have few statistical measures and the data is not yet believable because few people know about this disease. Overall, I would rate this study a 2 on the Pedro rating scale because it is thorough enough in its analysis despite the lack of knowledge found in this area. I believe that this article does not need a high rating since the condition is extremely rare. It is far more advantageous to put emphasis on research that is more important to the general public despite the fact that all areas need good care and research. Article 4: Factors associated with breast cancer screening behaviours in a sample of Turkish women: A questionnaire survey This articles, much like the many articles made in the health sciences, has a bias and specific treatment demographic category. It does not use random allocation because Muslim women are the only people being treated. It is not too clear as to who is involved in the study but allocation concealment exists. It uses a somewhat blind approach when comparing the two groups at baseline (2 points). The tests that are used include t-tests, chi-squared tests, and linear regression so it deserves another 2 points. The evidence is clear as to who goes to get breast examinations and the research is to determine something that we already know a lot about (4 + 1 = 5 points). Overall, this article gets 5 points and is fair. I think they could have gone more in depth into their research. I also feel that Muslim and Turkish women are important to do a study on but it would have a much broader effectiveness for more women if the population was more diverse and more cultural backgrounds were included in the demographic. Article 5: Effects of Whole-Body Vibration on Sensorimotor Performance in People With Parkinson Disease: A Systematic Review This study is thorough and has a Pedro rating scale used to measure the research that it conducted. For that, it already means that the score is going to be in the 1b category. The demographics are clear and the type of treatment is established and believable. It is definitely a randomized trial with concealed allocation. It uses a blind approach and there is definitely followup or at least a mention of potential followup (4 points). The statistical components are included despite lack of enough testing. All in all, there is a total of 3 more points because of the amount of sound statistical evidence provided in an experiment that is new. Since the research within the article mentions that little is known about this topic and that only one good article is established in determining their results, it is going to get 7 points on the Pedro rating scale, which means that it is a good research article. The article could have been improved by coming up with alternative methods or an establishment of the type of exercise a person can do with parkinson disorder. Article 6: Long-term effect of aspirin on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: 20-year follow-up of five randomised trials This article is incredibly thorough in its research and covers many aspects of cancer treatment that the other articles did not. The fact that the research is quite easy to understand and its demographics are clear leaving little ambiguity makes for a great Pedro rating. It is quite easy to understand the statistical measurements used to calculate the results as well. I give this article a Pedro rating of 8 for its thorough and practical research methods. It is randomized, double-blinded, and gives statistical output that is clear, concise, and allows for proper results to be conducted. Works Cited Cohen, A., Maschopoulos, P., Stiehm, R.E., and Koren, G., 2011. Congenital varicella syndrome: the evidence for secondary prevention with varicella-zoster immune globulin. Canadian Medical Association, 183(2), pp.204-208. Lau, R.W.K., Teo, T., Yu, F., Chung, R.C.K., and Pang, M.Y.C., 2011. Effects of whole-body vibration on sensorimotor performance in people with Parkinson Disease: a systematic review. Physical Therapy, 91(2), pp.198-209. PEDro Physiotherapy Evidence Database, 2011. 5. How are trials rated? [online] (Updated 7 Feb 2011) Available at http://www.pedro.org.au/english/faq/#question_five [Accessed 17 Feb 2011]. Rothwell, P.M., Wilson, M., Elwin, C.E., Norrving, B., Algra, A., Warlow, C.P., and Meade, T.W., 2010. Long-term effect of aspirin on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: 20-year follow-up of five randomised trials. Lancet, 376(9754), pp.1741-1750. Schreinemachers, D.M., and Everson, R.B., 1994. Aspirin use and lung, colon, and breast cancer incidence in a prospective study. Epidemiology, 5(2), pp.138-146. Secginli, S., and Nahcivan, N.O., 2006. Factors associated with breast cancer screening behaviours in a sample of Turkish women: a questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 43(2), pp.161-171. Truesdell, D.D., 2009. The efficacy of nutrition and lifestyle approaches in the treatment of depression. Topics in Clinical Nutrition, 24(1), pp.55–66. Read More