Skip to main content
MedVellum
QuestionsVideosPricing

MedVellum

Fellowship exam preparation across every specialty: source-verified topics, questions in every format, and videos.

Product

  • Specialties
  • Questions
  • Videos
  • Exam tools
  • Pricing

Verification & policy

  • Verified register
  • Editorial policy
  • Privacy
  • Terms

Account

  • Sign in
  • Create account
  • Dashboard
  • Account & billing

© 2026 MedVellum. For education only — not a substitute for clinical judgement.

llms.txtPsychiatry LLM catalogSitemap

Paeds Casesprofessional-practice-and-evidence

Paeds Cases · professional-practice-and-evidence

Appraising a trial for a shared decision — OSCE

OSCE on appraising a randomised trial and applying its evidence to a shared decision with a family.

osce critical appraisal and shared decision2 min readVerification in progress

Target exams

MRCPCH ClinicalRACP DCERCPSC Pediatrics
On this page
Study tools

Target exams

MRCPCH ClinicalRACP DCERCPSC Pediatrics
Prompt
Parents of a 4-year-old with a chronic illness are deciding whether to start a daily preventive therapy; they have read online that it 'reduces the risk of a serious complication by 50%'; you have a randomised trial in adults reporting that figure, a p-value of 0.04, and a confidence interval whose lower bound crosses unity in children.

Station brief (8–10 minutes)

Help the parents decide whether to start the preventive therapy by appraising the trial honestly and applying it to their child. Address the online '50 percent' figure, the trial's validity, the magnitude and precision of the effect, and its applicability to a four-year-old. Do not invent jurisdiction-specific thresholds or specific survival statistics. [1]

Paediatrics Fellowship Pro

Continue reading

You have read the opening of this case. The complete unit — every section and its primary-source references — is part of the Paediatrics Fellowship fellowship library.

Sign in to continueSee pricing
References6ShowHide
  1. [1]Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't BMJ, 1996.PMID 8555924
  2. [2]Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials BMJ, 2019.PMID 31462531
  3. [3]Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ, et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence J Clin Epidemiol, 2011.PMID 21208779
  4. [4]Andrews J, Guyatt G, Oxman AD, et al. GRADE guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and presentation of recommendations J Clin Epidemiol, 2013.PMID 23312392
  5. [5]Greenhalgh T How to read a paper. Statistics for the non-statistician. II: Significant relations and their pitfalls BMJ, 1997.PMID 9277611
  6. [6]Murad MH, Montori VM, Ioannidis JP, et al. How to read a systematic review and meta-analysis and apply the results to patient care: users' guides to the medical literature JAMA, 2014.PMID 25005654
Paediatrics Fellowship Pro

$29/ monthor $279 / year

The complete Paediatrics Fellowship library, every exam format, one subscription.

  • Complete library for one chosen specialty
  • Timed MCQ mock exams and spaced review
  • Clinical cases & cross-table vivas
See pricingSign in
PreviousAdolescent confidentiality OSCE — conditional script, override and the portal breachprofessional-practice-and-evidenceNextAppraising design and bias at the bedside — OSCEprofessional-practice-and-evidence