Critical Appraisal of Scientific Articles

D espite the increasing number of scientific publications, many physicians find themselves with less and less time to read what others have written. Selection, reading, and critical appraisal of publications is, however, necessary to stay up to date in one's field. This is also demanded by the precepts of evidence-based medicine (1, 2). Besides the medical content of a publication, its interpretation and evaluation also require understanding of the statistical methodology. Sadly, not even in science are all terms always used correctly. The word "significance," for example, has been overused because significant (or positive) results are easier to get published (3, 4). The aim of this article is to present the essential principles of the evaluation of scientific publications. With the exception of a few specific features, these principles apply equally to experimental, clinical, and epidemiological studies. References to more detailed literature are provided.