The ultimate aim of the critical reading of medical literature is to use the scientific advances in clinical practice or for innovation. This requires an evaluation of the applicability of the results of the studies that have been published, which begins with a clear understanding of these results. When the studies do not provide sufficient guarantees of rigor in design and analysis, the conditions necessary for the applicability of the results are not met; however, the fact that the results are reliable is not enough to make it worth trying to use their conclusions. This article explains how carrying out studies in experimental or artificial conditions often moves them away from the real conditions in which they claim to apply their conclusions. To evaluate this applicability, the article proposes evaluating a set of items that will enable the reader to determine the likelihood that the benefits and risks reported in the studies will yield the least uncertainty in the clinical arena where they aim to be applied.