Map the paper before you read it closely
Skim the abstract, the tables and the headings to understand the structure, then read the questions. Knowing what you will be asked tells you where to spend your reading time.
Paper IIA · Critical appraisal
DFPH Paper IIA: critical appraisal
The critical appraisal paper. You are given a published research paper and asked structured questions about its design, conduct, results and implications.
Reviewed 23 October 2026Official format and timings
At a glance
How Paper IIA is organised
Format and timing are set by the Faculty of Public Health and can change. The notes here describe the shape of the paper so you can plan your preparation; confirm the specifics on the official page.
One published paper
The questions follow the paper: summarising it, appraising its methods, interpreting its results and drawing out what it means for practice or policy.
What it tests
What Paper IIA expects you to be able to do
Summarising a study accurately: question, design, setting, participants, exposure or intervention, comparison and outcomes
Appraising the design: whether it can answer the question, and where bias, confounding or chance could have influenced the findings
Interpreting results: measures of effect, confidence intervals, p-values, absolute and relative differences, and what they mean in practice
Judging internal and external validity, and the generalisability of the findings to a specified population
Drawing out implications for public health practice and policy, with appropriate caveats
Communicating clearly for a stated audience, which may be non-specialist
How to approach it
Habits that earn marks
These are the working methods that tend to separate a comfortable pass from a near miss. None are secrets; the difference is practising them until they are automatic.
Use a framework, but anchor every point in the paper
Checklists such as the CASP tools are useful scaffolding. Generic criticisms ("the sample may not be representative") score poorly unless you say why, with reference to what the authors actually did.
Interpret the numbers in words
Translate a hazard ratio or a confidence interval into a plain statement about what the data show, how precise the estimate is and whether the effect would matter in practice.
Write for the audience the question names
If a question asks for a summary for a board, a committee or the public, adjust the vocabulary and structure accordingly. Marks reward communication, not just analysis.
Common pitfalls
Where marks are usually lost
- Repeating the abstract instead of summarising in your own words
- Listing every possible bias without judging which ones actually threaten this study
- Declaring a non-significant result "no effect" without considering power and the confidence interval
- Running out of time on the early questions and leaving the implications question unanswered
Practise Paper IIA questions
The free set currently includes 1 original Paper IIA question on interpreting results, bias and confounding, study design, each with an explanation or model answer points. Every question is illustrative and original, not an official exam question.
Independent preparation resource. Not affiliated with or endorsed by the Faculty of Public Health.
All questions on DFPHprep are original and written to resemble the style of the exam. They are not official questions and have no connection to past or future papers. For the official syllabus, regulations and dates, see the FPH exam pages.
Revision advice that respects your time
A practical guide to planning DFPH revision around all four parts of the exam, with timed written practice as the backbone.