# Journal club paper review

An original MedLit discussion worksheet. Fill this in alongside the paper.
It is not a validated risk-of-bias tool or a substitute for your programme's requirements.

## Citation and question
- Title, authors, year, journal:
- DOI or PMID:
- Why this paper matters to this group:
- Population / intervention or exposure / comparator / outcome:

## What we could read
- Full text / abstract only:
- Protocol, supplement and registration available:
- Important unavailable information:

## Study design and methods
- Design, setting, recruitment and follow-up:
- What would make the groups comparable?
- How were outcomes measured?
- Who was missing from the analysis, and why?
- Were the outcomes and analyses planned in advance?

## Results
- Primary result, units and time point:
- Absolute numbers and effect estimate:
- Confidence interval and uncertainty:
- Relevant harms or competing outcomes:

## Three discussion points
For each point, record the source page, table or passage.
1. A reported strength:
2. A concern that could change interpretation:
3. A question the available text cannot answer:

## Applicability and conclusion
- Who does the studied population represent?
- Where might these findings not apply?
- How does this fit with other evidence?
- Our current interpretation:
- What would change our interpretation?

## After the meeting
- Corrections and unresolved disagreements:
- Follow-up reading:

Prepared with MedLit: https://medlit-evidence-appraisal.vercel.app