How was the resource compiled? Were explicit criteria for seeking and appraising evidence described and were they adhered to? How is the resource maintained?
Rating scale for methods and quality of information
0 No evidence cited 1 Evidence is cited but there are no explicit criteria for the selection or the evaluation of the content; the selection of content suggests lack of consistent evidence standards 2 Evidence is cited and there are explicit criteria for the selection or evaluation of the content, or both; the selection of content suggests lack of adherence to these evidence standards 3 Evidence is cited but there are no explicit criteria for the selection or evaluation of the content; the selection of content suggests adherence to some evidence standards 4 Evidence is cited and there are explicit criteria for the selection or evaluation of the content, or both; the selection of content suggests some adherence to evidence standards 5 Evidence is cited and there are explicit criteria for the selection and evaluation of the content; the selection of content suggests adherence to evidence standards most of the time
|
Did the resource provide clinically useful answers? How did you use this resource? Was it easy to use? Were the answers easily accessible and readable within a few minutes? Will you use this resource? If so, when and how?
Rating scale for clinical usefulness
0 Not useful clinically 1 Clinically useful answers are rarely available and are not easily accessible or readable within a few minutes 2 Clinically useful answers are available some of the time but are not easily accessible or readable within a few minutes 3 Clinically useful answers are available some of the time and are easily accessible and readable within a few minutes 4 Clinically useful answers are available most of the time but are not easily accessible or readable within a few minutes 5 Clinically useful answers are available most of the time and are easily accessible and readable within a few minutes
|
