Resources for Researchers
Answer up to four questions about the study in front of you. This will name the right tool, explain why it fits, and give you a sentence you can paste straight into your methods section.
A review pools results from studies that already exist. A primary study collects its own data.
If more than one applies, pick the one closest to your purpose — you can step back at any point.
Choose the study design that best matches your research.
Critical appraisal
Critical appraisal is how you judge whether a piece of research is
credible, well conducted and relevant to your question. It carries the
most weight in systematic and scoping reviews, and in any evidence
synthesis where the risk of bias in the studies you include determines
how much your own conclusions can be trusted.
Appraisal tools are not interchangeable. Each was written for a particular study design, and applying the wrong one produces an assessment that looks rigorous but tests the wrong things. CONSORT and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool were built for randomised controlled trials. STROBE and ROBINS-I address observational studies. CASP and the JBI toolkits cover a wide range of designs including systematic reviews and qualitative work. Specialised instruments exist for particular formats — MMAT for mixed-methods studies, AGREE II for clinical practice guidelines.
Whichever tool you choose, apply it consistently across every study in your review. If you are unsure, check with your research guide and follow the instructions in the tool’s own manual.
Tool library
Appraisal tools ask whether a study was done well. Reporting guidelines ask whether it was described completely. Most reviews need both.
Methodological quality and risk of bias in systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. The standard choice when a review is your unit of analysis.
Appraisal URL not supplied
Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. For studies and reviews that combine qualitative and quantitative evidence.
Appraisal URL not supplied
Reporting completeness of a published systematic review. Use when you are checking what was described, not what was done.
Reporting URL not supplied
Structured, approachable appraisal across many designs. Well suited to teaching and to a first appraisal.
Appraisal URL not supplied
Risk of bias and applicability across four domains, for studies comparing a test against a reference standard.
Appraisal URL not supplied
Reporting standard for randomised controlled trials. Pair it with CASP or JBI for the appraisal itself.
Reporting URL not supplied
Reporting standard for Reporting standard for cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies. Runs alongside AXIS or Newcastle–Ottawa.cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies. Runs alongside AXIS or Newcastle–Ottawa.
Reporting URL not supplied
Star-based quality assessment for cohort and case-control studies. Widely used in meta-analysis.
Appraisal URL not supplied
Quality and reporting in cross-sectional studies, where prevalence or characteristics are measured at one point in time.
Appraisal URL not supplied
Reporting guideline for single case reports and small case series.
Reporting URL not supplied
For economic evaluations assessing cost, value or resource allocation of an intervention.
Reporting URL not supplied
Useful links
