Journal Club



Ohio Academy of Audiology Journal Club Appraisal Form

Date: 2/6/2020

|Journal Club Clinical Question (PICOT): |

|In adults with hearing loss, what is the effect of hearing aid fitting approach on verification and validation of hearing aid benefit? |

ARTICLE APPRAISAL

|Valente, M., Oeding, K., Brockmeyer, A., Smith, S., & Kallogjeri, D. (2018) Differences in Word and Phoneme Recognition in Quiet, Sentence Recognition in Noise,|

|and Subjective Outcomes between Manufacturer First-Fit and Hearing Aids Programmed to NAL-NL2 Using Real-Ear Measures. Journal of the American Academy of |

|Audiology 29 (8), 706-721. DOI: |

1. What is the Clinical Question (PICOT) for this article?

• Patient/Problem: _____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

• Intervention: _________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

• Comparison: _________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

• Outcome: ___________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

• Time (if applicable): ___________________________________________________________________

2. Level of Evidence (refer to Helpful Hints): I II III IV V

3. Quality of Evidence:

a. Are the results valid within the study? Validity: Low Medium High

b. Are the results statistically significant? No Some Yes

c. Are the results generalizable to your practice? Transferability: Low Medium High

4. Take Home Points:

a. _________________________________________________________________________________

b. _________________________________________________________________________________

c. _________________________________________________________________________________

CLINICAL BOTTOM LINE

1. What do you still have questions about? _____________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________

2. What needs to be considered for your clinical practice? (Changes to protocols, confirmation protocols are correct, etc) _______________________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________

3. Do you foresee changes in your own clinical practice after reading this article? Yes Maybe No

If so, what resources and support would you need to successfully implement change?

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

HELPFUL HINTS

|Level of Evidence: |

|Level |

|Study Design/Methodology of articles* |

| |

|I |

|Systematic reviews, meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials |

| |

|II |

|Two groups, nonrandomized studies (e.g.: cohort, case-control) |

| |

|III |

|One group, nonrandomized (e.g.: before and after, pretest and post-test) |

| |

|IV |

|Descriptive studies that include analysis of outcomes (single subject design, case series) |

| |

|V |

|Case reports and expert opinion, which include narrative literature reviews and consensus statements. |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

|Validity: Are the results valid within the study? Did they truly measure what they claimed to measure? How rigorous were the design and methods? |

| |

|[pic] |

|Consider: |

|Were participants randomly selected or consecutive admissions (to minimize selection bias)? |

|Was there an independent, blind comparison with a reference “gold standard” of diagnosis? |

|Was the reference (gold) standard applied regardless of the index test results (ideally both should be carried out on all participants)? |

|Was the study conducted in a controlled environment (lab)? |

|Did they use the best tools/methods to answer their question (i.e. specific tests used)? |

|Transferability: Are the results generalizable outside the study? |

|[pic] |

|Consider: |

|Was the diagnostic test evaluated in a representative spectrum of clients like you would see in clinic (different degrees of the disorder, early and late onset of |

|disorder)? |

|Were study settings/conditions natural? |

|Was the rapport with testers/observers adequate? |

|Were procedures/tasks natural? |

|Was the timing and length of the study appropriate? |

|Were results restricted to a specific time in history? |

|*The Level of Evidence table was presented in the AOTA EBP Project CAP Guidelines Evidence Exchange and was adapted from Sackett, D.L., Rosenberg, W.M., Muir Gray,|

|J.A., Haynes, R.B. & Richardson, W.S. (1996). Evidence-based medicine: What it is and what it isn’t. British Medical Journal, 312, 71-72). |

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download