Abstract
Critical evaluation of each section of a paper is needed in order to properly assess the purpose and quality of the paper and to understand the degree to which the results can influence clinical practice. Reviewing a paper is a skill that is best honed by practice, but there is no real formal training during medical school or residency on what to evaluate during a review and what the review process involves for a journal. Thus, this chapter will highlight the major points to review in each section of a paper and will provide a guide for young investigators to use while interpreting the findings of a paper. Additionally, the components of a review submission to a journal will be outlined.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Brand RA. Writing for clinical orthopaedics and related research. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466(1):239–47.
Higgins J, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons; 2008. https://search.library.wisc.edu/catalog/9910060197402121.
Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4:1. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1.
Ramisetty N, Kwon Y, Mohtadi N. Patient-reported outcome measures for hip preservation surgery—a systematic review of the literature. J Hip Preserv Surg. 2015;2(1):15–27. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhps/hnv002.
Schulz KF. Subverting randomization in controlled trials. JAMA. 1995;274(18):1456–8. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1995.03530180050029.
Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMC Med. 2010;8(1):18. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-8-18.
Stone AV, Jacobs CA, Luo TD, et al. High degree of variability in reporting of clinical and patient-reported outcomes after hip arthroscopy. Am J Sports Med. 2017;46(12):3040–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546517724743.
Thorborg K, Tijssen M, Habets B, et al. Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) questionnaires for young to middle-aged adults with hip and groin disability: a systematic review of the clinimetric evidence. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49(12):812. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2014-094224.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 ISAKOS
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Patel, N.K., Yeung, M., Nagai, K., Musahl, V. (2019). How to Review a Clinical Research Paper?. In: Musahl, V., et al. Basic Methods Handbook for Clinical Orthopaedic Research. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-58254-1_28
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-58254-1_28
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-58253-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-58254-1
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)