The Stroke Rehabilitation Evidence-Based Review (SREBR) reviews techniques, therapies, devices, procedures and medications associated with stroke rehabilitation.

speechBITE is a database of intervention studies across the scope of speech pathology practice. The database provides ready access to citations and, where possible, abstracts from systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials, non-randomised controlled trials, single-case experimental designs and case series. speechBITE also indexes clinical practice guidelines of relevance to speech pathology practice. To assist clinicians with interpreting the methodological quality of the treatment studies, speechBITE provides ratings on the PEDro-P scale for randomised and non-randomised controlled trials.

Up to Date is an evidence-based clinical information resource that provides the information in an encyclopedic format with references to clinical trials. Register for an account on UpToDate to get access to the mobile app. NOTE: Up To Date is now only available for current UofT Students and Residents.

On this page you will find links to seminal articles in the BMJ that explain how to read and interpret different kinds of research papers.

This set of eight critical appraisal tools are designed to be used when reading research, these include tools for Systematic Reviews, Randomised Controlled Trials, Cohort Studies, Case Control Studies, Economic Evaluations, Diagnostic Studies, Qualitative studies and Clinical Prediction Rule.

CATmaker is a computer-assisted critical appraisal tool, which helps you create Critically Appraised Topics (CATs), for the key articles you encounter about Therapy, Diagnosis, Prognosis, Aetiology/Harm and Systematic Reviews of Therapy.

ACP Journal Club summarizes the best new evidence for internal medicine from over 130 clinical journals. Once a bimonthly stand-alone journal, ACP Journal Club is now a monthly feature of Annals of Internal Medicine. Research staff and clinical editors rigorously assess the scientific merit of the medical literature as it is published and a worldwide panel of over 5000 physicians assesses the clinical relevance and newsworthiness of rigorous studies.

The CATS on this site were written by graduate learners in the Evaluating Sources of Evidence course offered through McMaster University and UBC from 2002-2012 and in the UBC Evidence for Practice course.

CATS begin to provide direction for practice by asking a clinical question, reviewing the literature and summarizing the best available research evidence on the subject. These CATs were reviewed by the instructors and learners in the course but independent peer reviews were not conducted. They are not edited and appear as submitted by the learners who gave their permission for posting. Questions or feedback regarding these CATs may be addressed to the Program Assistant.

This site contains CATs and CAPs focussing on occupational therapy interventions. The earlier topics were completed by Australian occupational therapists participating in a year-long research project between 2002 and 2003. Completion of a CAT or CAP was the major assignment for the study, and resulted in the development of the website. Participants in that study identified a common clinical problem, wrote a focussed clinical question, conducted a search for the best available evidence, then appraised and summarised the evidence. Studies on the effectiveness of an intervention were sought. The aim was to locate current best evidence, such as systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials. However, in the absence of such research, lower level studies were found and appraised.

There are multiple sites on the internet containing CATs or CAPs. Most have a medical focus. Some CATs and CAPs are peer reviewed, some are not. These occupational therapy CATs have not been formally peer reviewed, other than by myself, the developer of the site. A major benefit of a CAT or CAP is its brevity and simplicity. However, one limitation is the absence of independent peer review. Readers cannot be certain that a thorough and complete search of the literature has been conducted nor that an accurate interpretation of the methods, results and statistics has been made. Please keep this fact in mind if using these CATs or CAPs to guide your practice.