The McMaster Online Rating of Evidence (MORE) criteria for clinical relevance and newsworthiness
| Score | Relevance to clinical practice in your discipline—criteria | Newsworthiness to clinical practice in your discipline—criteria |
|---|---|---|
| No score | Beyond my personal area of expertise but may be of interest to my discipline | I don't know if this is newsworthy |
| 7 | Directly and highly relevant | Useful information; most practitioners in my discipline definitely do not know this (unless they have read this article) |
| 6 | Definitely relevant | Useful information; most practitioners in my discipline probably do not know this |
| 5 | Probably relevant | Useful information; most practitioners in my discipline possibly do not know this |
| 4 | Possibly relevant: likely of indirect or peripheral relevance at best | Useful information; most practitioners in my discipline possibly already know this |
| 3 | Possibly not relevant | Useful information; most practitioners in my discipline probably already know this |
| 2 | Probably not relevant: content only remotely related | It probably does not matter whether they know this or not |
| 1 | Definitely not relevant: completely unrelated content area | Not of direct clinical interest |