Critical appraisal:Mounessi FS, Lehrich P, Haverkamp U, Willich N, Bölling T, Eich HT 2013

From Clinical Guidelines Wiki

Critical Appraisal

Article being appraised

Mounessi FS, Lehrich P, Haverkamp U, Willich N, Bölling T, Eich HT. Pelvic Ewing sarcomas. Three-dimensional conformal vs. intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Strahlenther Onkol 2013 Apr;189(4):308-14. doi: 10.1007/s00066-012-0304-z. Epub 2013 Feb 28. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23443613.


Applicable clinical question

Key Facts

Study Design

case series

Number of Patients:

8


Includes an economic evaluation

no

Evidence ratings

Level of evidence

IV

Risk of bias
High risk of bias Comments: Study on 8 patients evaluating IMRT vs 3DCRT for pelvic Ewings sarcomas.

Risk of bias assessment: case series

Subject selection:
Highly selected or not described (e.g. single-institution study)
Were the outcome measures blind to pre/post-intervention?
No or not described
Follow-up complete and all patients included in the analysis?
No or not described
Size of effect
3 Reason for decision: Please replace this text and briefly describe the reasons for your rating
Relevance of evidence
5 Additional comments: Surrogates used are V30 and and conformity, cannot be directly related to clinical outcomes.
Result of appraisal

Jutta's tick icon.png Included




Completed by

Dr Sarat Chander FRANZCR


Jutta's tick icon.png This appraisal has been completed.


Article
Mounessi FS, Lehrich P, Haverkamp U, Willich N, Bölling T, Eich HT. Pelvic Ewing sarcomas. Three-dimensional conformal vs. intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Strahlenther Onkol 2013 Apr;189(4):308-14. doi: 10.1007/s00066-012-0304-z. Epub 2013 Feb 28. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23443613.
Assigned to
User:Sarat.chander
Topic area
Guidelines:Sarcoma
Clinical question
Form
Form:Critical appraisal


Section below only relevant for Cancer Council Project Officer

Edit appraisal assignment