Professional Documents
Culture Documents
4. Do the authors give sufficient background information for the study? Did
they demonstrate that the study was important and ethical?
(Yes)
5. Are the purpose and the objectives clearly stated and free from bias?
(Yes)
9. Are the inclusion and exclusion criteria clearly stated, and are they
appropriate?
(No)
10. Was the study randomized correctly? Even if the study is adequately
randomized, are the groups (treatment and control) equivalent?
(No)
12. Was the study adequately controlled? Were the controls adequate and
appropriate?
(Yes, it belonged to time, concentration, temperature, and composition of
the drug)
16. If the study is a crossover study, was the washout period adequate?
(-)
18. Were appropriate statistical tests chosen to assess the data? Were the
levels of and error chosen before the data were gathered?
(No)
20. If multiple observers were collecting data, did the authors describe how?
(No, there is no multiple observers)
21. Did the authors justify the instrumentation used in the study?
(Yes)
22. Were measurements or assessments of effects made at the appropriate
times and frequency?
(Yes, at 0, 4, 7, 24, and 48 hours)
24. Are standard deviations or confidence intervals shown along with mean
values?
(No)
26. Are there any potential problems with internal validity or external
validity? Internal validity types include history, maturation,
instrumentation, selection, morbidity, and mortality.
(No)
28. Are the conclusions supported by the data? Is some factor other than the
study treatment responsible for the outcomes?
(Yes, No)
32. Would this article change clinical practice or a recommendation that you
would give to a patient or health-care professional?
(Yes, especially for sepsis treatment, we recommend for the interval drug
using)