1 of 3

UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO HOSPITAL

QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE
Facilitator of Journal Club
Name:Kerri Jeppson Date:8/1/2014
Article Reviewed: Seners, P., Turc, G., Tisserand, ., !e"rand, !., !abe#rie, ., Calvet, $., eder, J., as, J.,
%&&en'ei(, C., and )aron, J. *ne+&lained ,arl# -eurolo"ical $eterioration After .ntravenous T'ro(bol#sis:
.ncidence, Predictors, and Associated Factors. Stoke. /011. 2134. /0015/006.

(Facilitator Info: Before you bein your criti!ue" rea# t$e criti!ue for% to be a&are of &$at !uestions you s$oul# ans&er after rea#in
t$e article' ($en" rea# t$e article for a first o)er)ie& or i%pression' Finally" rea# t$e article aain" slo&ly' Stop an# ans&er t$e
!uestions fro% t$e criti!ue for%' *i$li$t t$e ans&ers in t$e article' +lso" on t$e criti!ue for%" &rite pae nu%bers of &$ere ans&ers
can be foun# to $elp you &$en you are lea#in t$e #iscussion at t$e Journal ,lub' +s you plan for t$e -ournal club" refer to t$e
.esearc$ an# /)i#ence0Base# 1ractice 2anual 2
n#
/#ition' ,$apter 3 title# 1articipatin in a Journal ,lub pro)i#es step by step
a#)ice for t$e process'4
Research Purpose:
7'at is t'e &ur&ose of t'e stud#8 .nvesti"ate because little is 9nown about ,-$5une+&lained wit'out clear
(ec'anis(.

.s t'e researc' :uestion clearl# identified8 .nvesti"ate incidence, &redictors and associated factors of &ost5
t'o(bol#sis ,-$5une+&lained.
Review of Literature/Background:
$o t'e aut'ors s&ecif# a t'eoretical;conce&tual fra(ewor9 "uidin" t'e stud# 2do t'e# &rovide a <word
&icture= or visual i(a"e of t'e fra(ewor948 S&ecif# t'e fra(ewor9;conce&tual (odel used:
-%
!iterature reviewed relevant to t'e stud# &ur&ose8 >es5es&eciall# t'e first ?
Review lo"icall# and clearl# or"ani@ed8 >es. Goes t'rou"' t'e &rocess t'e# went t'rou"' clearl#. Tables
clear. Results and discussion clearl# identifies findin"s.
$oes t'e review &ri(aril# use current literature8 2&ublis'ed wit'in t'e last 3 #ears, unless a <classic= 4 >es
7ere &ri(ar# sources used8 2A &ri(ar# source is written b# t'e &erson w'o ori"inated t'e ideas &ublis'ed4
2. A -%T S*R, %- TA.S %-,4
Research Design and Methods:
.nstitutional review board 2.R)4 a&&roval8 >es -o -ot (entioned5sa#s it was not needed
7'at t#&e of desi"n2s4 was 2were4 used8 Circle all t'at a&&l#:
,+&eri(entalB Cuasi5e+&eri(entalB CorrelationalB ,+&lorator#B $escri&tiveB Surve#B
%t'er:555,+&lorator#
7as sa(&le described8>es
7'at is sa(&le si@e8 -DEE306EE
/ of 3
.s t'e sa(&le si@e, selection, and re&resentativeness ade:uate and a&&ro&riate8 >es, alt'ou"' w'en t'e#
bro9e it down to t'ose t'at 'ad ,-$5une+&lained t'e sa(&le si@e was s(all
7'at sa(&lin" (et'od was used8 Rando(i@edB ConvenienceB %t'er:55Convenience
!ist t'e inclusion and e+clusion criteria:
T'e &atients received .F5TPA wit' in 1.3 'rs of sto9e onset,
,+cluded if t'e# received .A5TPA
Patients t'at 'ad CA stro9e
7'at is t'e settin" for t'e stud#8 Aos&ital usin" t'e database
Can #ou identif# t'e variable in t'e stud#8 $ifficult
!ist 9e# variables
o .nde&endent 2intervention4:"ivin" .F5TPA wit'in 1.3'rs
o $e&endent 2outco(e4: .dentif# t'e causes of ,-$5une+&lained
o $e(o"ra&'ics: see Table 1
Data collection, measurement, and analsis:
$escribe t'e (et'od of data collection: &ros&ective database
$id t'e# (a9e sense to #ou8 -%
Are instru(ents;tools used reliable and valid8 >,S
$escribe t'e (et'od of data anal#sis: *niveriate anal#sis and (ultivariate anal#sis. SAS and SPSS
!indings/Results and "onclusions
Results or"ani@ed lo"icall# and &resented clearl#8 >,S
)riefl# describe results and t'e conclusions drawn fro( t'e(. Are t'e conclusions consistent wit' t'e
results8 $o t'e answers (a9e sense8 ,-$ une+&lained is associated wit' &oor outco(es. Prio
anti&latelet 'el&ed &rotect a"ainst, '#&er"l#ce(ia on ad(ission, lower -.ASS on ad(ission, and &ro+i(al
occlusion were all &redictors of ,-$5une+&lained
Are t'e conclusions discussed in relation to t'e t'eoretical;conce&tual fra(ewor98 T'ere was none
$oes t'e researc'er &lace t'e re&ort in t'e conte+t of w'at is alread# 9nown about t'e researc' :uestion8
2e."., ot'er studies, &'iloso&'ies4>,S
Are t'e li(itations;biases concernin" enou"' to cause #ou to :uestion t'e validit# of t'e results8 -%5
S(all sa(&le wit' ,-$5une+&lained, didnGt use .A5TPA &atients, t'e -.ASS of HD1
3 of 3
Are su""estions for future researc' included8 .f so, w'at are t'e#8 >es, researc' wit' a lar"er sa(&le si@e
Professional conte#t:
Are t'e i(&lications for &ractice clearl# stated 2i.e., 'ow do t'e conclusions of t'e stud# affect (# &ractice48
!ist t'e i(&lications: For &atients co(in" in wit' .F5TPA "iven, &a# close attention to '#&er"l#ce(ia,
es&eciall# t'ose wit' a low -.ASS w'ere #ou (i"'t 'ave not been on 'i"' alert due to t'eir low score.
!oo9 to see if #our &atients were on anti&latelet t'era&# before'and. a9e sure #ou 9now w'ere t'e
&atients occlusion was and loo9 at (onitorin" t'ose wit' Pro+i(al occlusion (ore closel#.
Su((ari@e one ele(ent;findin" in t'is article t'at #ou will;will not use in #our &ractice as a result of readin"
t'is article.
What is the level of evide!e fo" this st#d$% I believe it is a LOE 4
Level Evidence
1 Systematic review & meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials; clinical guidelines
based on systematic reviews or meta-analyses
One or more randomized controlled trials
!ontrolled trial "no randomization#; $uasi-e%&erimental
4 !ase-control or co'ort study
( Systematic review of descri&tive studies; systematic review of $ualitative studies
"metasynt'esis#
) Single descri&tive or $ualitative study
* +rogram evaluation, researc' utilization, $uality im&rovement &ro-ects; case re&orts ".!
sentinel event#; benc'mar/ing studies "0102I data, 34! re&orts#; or researc'-based
clinical &ractice guidelines
5 E%&ert o&inion "aut'orities and6or re&orts of e%&ert committees# te%tboo/s, clinical
&roduct guidelines; non-researc' based clinical &ractice guidelines
St"o&est
Evide!e
Wea'est
Evide!e