Clarity comments on Why Academic Papers Are A Terrible Discussion Forum - Less Wrong

25 Post author: alyssavance 20 June 2012 06:15PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (54)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Clarity 27 March 2016 12:25:23PM 0 points [-]

And here is the upside. Other than the confounding point, academic papers in settled fields get studies that answer 'yes' to the following criteria (taken from the centre for evidence based something or the other):

  1. Is the evidence from a known, reputable source?

    1. Has the evidence been evaluated in any way? If so, how and by whom?

    2. How up-to-date is the evidence?

Second, you could look at the study itself and ask the following general appraisal questions:

  1. Did the study address a clearly focused issue?

  2. Is the study design appropriate to the stated aims?

  3. Are the measurements likely to be valid and reliable?

  4. Are the statistical methods described?

  5. How large was the effect size?

  6. How precise was the estimate of the effect (look for the confidence intervals!)

  7. Could there be confounding?

  8. What implications does the study have for your practice? Is it relevant?

  9. Can the results be applied to your organization?

  10. Is the intervention feasible in your organization?