2: Appraising an original article related to the poor practice
Assessment type;
Critical appraisal
Word limit/length;
1500 words plus 500 extras (including citations, references, and any tables/figures)
Overview
In this assignment, you critically appraise ONE published peer-reviewed journal article related to the practice discussed in assignments 1 and/or 2. You can choose one of the three options concerning the type/design of the paper chosen: a) an original quantitative research article (primary evidence), b) an original qualitative research article (primary evidence), and c) a systematic review (secondary evidence). Having found a suitable appraisal tool for the chosen article you will cite these tools and the article for appraisal, then the critical appraisal will follow, discussing the clinical significance of the article and its relevance to practice.
Learning outcomes
This assignment task is aligned with the following unit learning outcomes:
- Demonstrate an in-depth understanding of the main research philosophical perspectives and methodologies including their assumptions and practical applications.
- Critically appraise evidence
Assignment structure
The heading below can be used in appraising the evidence chosen:
- Title for assignment – “Appraising evidence for NAME OF THE PAPER CHOSEN”
- Appraisal tool – explain the suitable appraisal tool chosen according to the study design (e.g., qualitative, quantitative, or secondary papers, such as systematic reviews).
- Journal – explain the reliability of the journal (e.g., impact factor, Q ranking, ERA listing).
- Author/s – explain if the authors are reliable researchers (based on their affiliations/organisation and their background/qualification related to the study/topic).
- Title and Abstract – explain if the title and abstract are clear, concise, and understandable.
- Introduction/background – Assess if the paper includes research aim/question/hypothesis; gap/s in literature; and clear, sufficient, updated, and in-depth literature justifying the topic.
- Research method/design – Summarise the methods used in the article, and the hierarchy of the evidence, and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the methodology.
- Results – Summarise the key findings of the article, and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the findings. For quantitative studies, you can discuss scores, correlations, confidence intervals, and p-values. For qualitative studies, you can provide the key themes.
- Discussionand conclusion – Discuss how this research is useful for practice and what the key take-home message is.
Notes to consider in preparation for assignment 2:
Frame a research question based on PICO/PIO, based on the design chosen. Quantitative design à P (population or problem); I (intervention); C (comparison – this may not be applicable); O (an outcome which can be related to health, social, a community care outcomes
- Consider a searching strategy (e.g., keywords, and linking them via Booleans) to find the most reliable source for appraisal and resolving the poor practice. The W2 unit content might be helpful for you in terms of strategy and analysing evidence. We recommend that you use a searching strategy (right keywords, and linking them via Booleans) to find the right evidence discussing the poor practice.
Please make sure that your appraisal provides a critical argument/justification of why the chosen paper is good evidence and how it helps practically to update/improve the policies, practice, and future research.
Please ensure to paraphrase at all times. Do not copy and paste information from the article into the report. The entire assignment should read like the paragraphs of an essay, they should not resemble a ‘checklist’.
Assessment 2 rubric
| Criteria |
| o Models of critique (2) – choosing the right model of critique based on the study designs.
o Authors (2) – assess the credibility of the authors o Title/abstract& journal(3) – assess if the title/abstract is clear, concise, and understandable; assess the reliability of the journal o Introduction/background(2) – Assess the research aims; gap in the literature; and supporting literature o Methods/design (6) – Assess the reliability of the method, strengths, and weaknesses of the methodology o Results(6) – Summarise the findings of the article based on their specific design. o Discussion and conclusion(6) – discuss the benefits of paper for practice and take-home messages. |
|
Presentation and references (3)
o clarity and brevity of expression/logical planning and sequence supported with appropriate headings/sub-headings/no repetition o use of non-discriminatory language o adherence to word limits o correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation o definition of all abbreviations on first use o precise, accurate, and correct referencing and in-text citations based on APA 7th style |
