[ANSWER]PBH91001 Assessment 3: Critical Appraisal of Primary and Secondary Research Articles

[ANSWER PREVIEW]

Critical Appraisal

Sande et al. (2011) aimed to examine the effectiveness of short-term risk assessment tools in reducing the incidence of patient aggression in acute psychiatric wards. According to the CASP Randomised Controlled Trial Standard Checklist, the research question in an RCT should be clearly focused in terms of the PICO format: the population of study, the intervention administered, the comparator chosen, and the outcomes measured (CASP, 2020).

In this study, the research question adheres to this guideline. The researchers sought to compare the use of the BVC and the Kennedy-Axis V in the intervention group and the use of unstructured clinical judgement in the control group in reducing incidents of aggression among patients admitted in acute psychiatric wards.

A total of 458 patients were involved in the study: 207 in the experimental group and 251 in the control group. This is a fairly small sample that may hinder generalizability beyond the study setting. The subjects were recruited from 4 acute psychiatric wards in a single hospital. Ideally, an RCT should provide evidence of randomization of participants (CASP, 2020). In this study, Critical Appraisal the selected wards were randomly allocated to either the experimental or control group following a 10-week pre-intervention period: 2 in the experimental group and 2 in the control group. As expected, the baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, type of admission (voluntary or involuntary), and diagnosis.

The randomization process should clarify whether the allocation sequence was revealed to the researchers and the subjects (CASP, 2020). For this trial, it is not clear whether this revelation was made or not. When evaluating an RCT, it is also important to check whether participants and investigators were blinded to the intervention. Blinding helps in reducing Critical Appraisal bias and enhancing research validity (Karanicolas, Farrokhyar & Bhandari, 2010). In this study, it is unclear whether the participants were blinded to the intervention, but the investigators were not.   Prior to the intervention period, psychiatric staff in…[Buy Full Answer for Just USD 9: 3274 WORDS]

[SOLUTION DESCRIPTION]

Critical Appraisal

Type: Essay

Word Count: 3274

Grade/Mark: 87 (Distinction)

GradedSolution