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 Vivasprofessional-practice-and-evidence

Paeds Vivas · professional-practice-and-evidence

Interpreting a systematic review — branching viva

Viva on interpreting a systematic review and a clinical practice guideline for a paediatric patient.

branching clinical structured oral3 min readVerification in progress

Target exams

RACP DCEMRCPCH ClinicalRCPSC Pediatrics
On this page
Study tools

Target exams

RACP DCEMRCPCH ClinicalRCPSC Pediatrics
Prompt
Journal club: you are given a meta-analysis claiming a new therapy halves the risk of a serious complication in children; the abstract reports a 50 percent relative pooled effect, an I-squared of 65 percent, an asymmetric funnel plot, and industry funding. A guideline cites this review to issue a strong recommendation.

Opening (candidate)

I would treat this as a structured appraisal of the synthesis and the guideline, not a result handover. First I would confirm the question was focused and preregistered, then read the PRISMA flow for the breadth and reproducibility of the search, then score the review's risk of bias with AMSTAR-2 before reading the pooled effect, then quantify heterogeneity and check the funnel plot, and finally rate the certainty with GRADE and weigh applicability to the child. [1] [2] [10]

Paediatrics Fellowship Pro

Continue reading

You have read the opening of this viva. 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]Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 2021.PMID 33782057
  2. [2]Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, et al. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ, 2017.PMID 28935701
  3. [4]Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ, 2003.PMID 12958120
  4. [7]Alonso-Coello P, Oxman AD, Moberg J, et al. GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 1: Introduction. BMJ, 2016.PMID 27365494
  5. [8]Andrews J, Guyatt G, Oxman AD, et al. GRADE guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and presentation of recommendations. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2013.PMID 23312392
  6. [10]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
PreviousImplementation science and translating evidence into practice — branching vivaprofessional-practice-and-evidenceNextLeadership and interprofessional team management — branching vivaprofessional-practice-and-evidence