Need to summarize each of the Qualitative, Quantiative and Systematic review of the article. See example below: Please include title of each article followed by summary.
Literature review:
- Is the review thorough – does it state how extensive the search was – the number of studies/articles accessed and reviewed? Include the number of articles reviewed. 2. Approximately what percent of articles are less than 5 years old? 10 years old? 3. Are studies from other related disciplines included, if appropriate? 4. Does the review rely on appropriate materials (research reports/articles)? 5. Is the review only a summary of existing work, or does it critically appraise and compare key studies? 6. Does the review identify important gaps in the literature? 7. Is the review well organized? 8. Is the review objective? How can you tell? 9. Does the author paraphrase, or is there an over-reliance on quotes from an original source?
Guide to an Overall Critique of a Qualitative Research Article Polit & Beck (2017) p 106-109
| Student Name | Date | ||
| Article Citation (APA format ) | |||
NUR 610 INSTRUCTIONS: The format of the critique follows the sections of the article. Pay attention to section headers on this document as that is where you will find information in the article. After answering YES/NO to the critique question (make answer bold or in italics), follow with a brief explanation or description of how the research demonstrated that the answer to the question. I f the question d oes not apply to the study, state that in the box.
| Aspect of the Research Article | |
| Title | |
| 1 Is the title a good one, suggesting the key phenomenon and the group or community under study? Explain: | Yes or No |
| Abstract | |
| 2. Does the abstract clearly and concisely summarize the main features of the report? Explain: | Yes or No |
| Introduction | |
| Statement of Problem | |
- Was the problem stated unambiguously, and was it easy to identify? Explain: 4. Is the problem significant for nursing? Explain:
- Were research questions explicitly stated? Explain:
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
| 5. Was there a good match between the research problem and the use of a qualitative approach, versus quantitative, to find the answer? Explain: | Yes or No |
| Hypothesis or research questions | |
| 7. Were the questions consistent with the study’s philosophical basis, underlying tradition, or ideological orientation? | Yes or No |
| Literature Review | |
1
Guide to an Overall Critique of a Qualitative Research Article Polit & Beck (2017) p 106-109
| 8. Did the article adequately summarize the existing body of knowledge related to the problem or phenomenon of interest? Explain: | Yes or No |
| 9. Was the literature review up-to-date (ideally less than 5 years unless classic)? Describe: | Yes or No |
| 10. Did the literature review provide support that the research performed in the article needed to be done (identify gap in literature/knowledge)? Explain: | Yes or No |
| Conceptual Underpinnings | |
- Were key concepts adequately defined conceptually? Explain:
Yes or No
| 12. Was the philosophical basis, underlying tradition (phenomenology, ethnography, or grounded theory), conceptual framework, or ideological orientation made explicit and was it appropriate for the problem ? Explain: | Yes or No |
| Method | |
| Protection of Human Rights | |
| 13. Were appropriate procedures used to safeguard rights of the study participants? Explain: | Yes or No |
| 14. Was the study reviewed by an Institutional Review Board (or ethics committee)? Explain: | Yes or No |
| Research Design | |
| 15. Was the identified research tradition (if any) congruent with the methods used to collect and analyze data? Explain: | Yes or No |
- Was an adequate amount of time spent with study participants? Explain:
- Was there an adequate number of contacts with study participants? Explain:
Yes or No
Yes or No
| 17. Did the design unfold during data collection, giving researchers opportunities to capitalize on early understandings? Explain: | Yes or No |
| Sample and Setting | |
| 19. Was the group or population of interest adequately described? Were the setting and sample described in sufficient detail? Explain: | Yes or No |
| 20. Was the approach used to recruit participants or gain access to the site productive and appropriate? Explain: | Yes or No |
| 21. Was the best possible method of sampling used to enhance information richness and address the needs of the study? Explain: | Yes or No |
Guide to an Overall Critique of a Qualitative Research Article Polit & Beck (2017) p 106-109
- Was the sample size adequate? Was saturation achieved? Explain:
Yes or No
| Data collection | |
| 23. Were the methods of gathering data appropriate? Were data gathered through two or more methods to achieve triangulation? Explain: | Yes or No |
| 24. Did the researcher ask the right questions or make the right observations, and were they recorded in an appropriate fashion? Explain: | Yes or No |
| 25. Was a sufficient amount of data gathered? Were the data of sufficient depth and richness? Explain: | Yes or No |
| Procedures | |
| 26. Were data collection and recording procedures adequately described and do they appear appropriate? Explain: | Yes or No |
| 27. Were data collected in a manner that minimized bias? Were the staff who collected data appropriately trained? Explain: | Yes or No |
| Enhancement of trustworthiness | |
| 28. Did the researchers use effective strategies to enhance the trustworthiness/integrity of the study, and was there a good description of those strategies? Explain: | Yes or No |
| 29. Did the researcher document research procedures and decision processes sufficiently that findings are auditable and confirmable? Explain: | Yes or No |
| 30. Was there “thick description” of the context, participants, and findings, and was it at a sufficient level to support transferability? Explain: | Yes or No |
| Results | |
| Data Analysis | |
| 31. Were the data management and data analysis methods adequately described? Explain: | Yes or No |
| 32. Was the data analysis strategy compatible with the research tradition and with the nature and type of data gathered? Explain: | Yes or No |
- Did the analytic procedures suggest the possibility of biases? Explain:
Yes or No
Yes or No
| Findings | |
| 34. Were the findings effectively summarized, with good use of quotes and supporting arguments? Explain: | Yes or No |
- Does it appear that the researcher satisfactorily conceptualized the themes or patterns
Guide to an Overall Critique of a Qualitative Research Article Polit & Beck (2017) p 106-109
in the data? Explain:
- Were figures, maps, or models used effectively to summarize conceptualizations?
Yes or No
Yes or No
| 36. Did the analysis yield an insightful, provocative, authentic, and meaningful picture of the phenomenon under investigation? Explain: | Yes or No |
| Theoretical integration | |
| Discussion |
| Interpretation of the findings |
- Were the findings interpreted within an appropriate social or cultural context? Explain:
| 39. Were major findings interpreted and discussed within the context of prior studies? Explain: | Yes or No |
| Implications/Recommendations | |
| 40. Did the researchers discuss the implications of the study for clinical practice or further research – and were those implications reasonable and complete? Explain: | Yes or No |
| General Issues | |
| Presentation | |
| 41. Was the article well-written, organized, and sufficiently detailed for critical analysis? Explain: | Yes or No |
| 42. Was the description of the methods, findings, and interpretations sufficiently rich and vivid? Explain: | Yes or No |
| 43. Was the report written in a manner that makes the findings accessible to practicing nurses? Explain: | Yes or No |
| Researcher Credibility | |
| 44. Do the researchers’ clinical, substantive, or methodologic qualifications and experience enhance confidence in the findings and their interpretation? | Yes or No |
| Summary Assessment | |
| 45. Does the study contribute any meaningful evidence that can be used in nursing practice or that is useful to the nursing discipline? | Yes or No |
When completed, sum the ‘yes’ answers. While still subjective, the greater number of ‘yes’ answers, the stronger the study is likely to be.
| Aspect of the Research Article |
| Title |
Abstract
- Does the abstract clearly and concisely summarize the main features of the research article (problem, methods, results, conclusions)? Explain:
- Was the problem stated clearly and was it easy to identify? Explain: 4. Is the problem significant for nursing? Explain:
Was there a good match between the research problem and the use of a quantitative method to find the answer (versus qualitative)? Explain:
Hypothesis or research questions
- Was the research question (or questions) and/or hypotheses clearly stated? Explain:
Literature Review
- Did the article adequately summarize the existing body of knowledge related to the problem or phenomenon of interest? Explain:
- Was the literature review up-to-date (ideally less than 5 years unless classic)? Describe:
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
| Introduction |
| Statement of Problem |
1
Guide to an Overall Critique of a Quantitative Research Article Polit & Beck (2017) p 102-105
- Did the literature review provide support that the research performed in the article needed to be done (identify gap in literature/knowledge)? Explain:
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Conceptual/Theoretical Framework
- Were the key concepts adequately defined? Explain: 10. Was the framework articulated clearly? Explain:
| Methods |
| Protection of Human Rights |
- Were appropriate procedures used to safeguard rights of the study participants? Explain:
- Was the study reviewed by an Institutional Review Board (or ethics committee)? Explain:
Research Design
- Was the most rigorous design used for the research (Experimental (RCT), Quasi-experimental, Non-experimental)? Explain:
- Were the data collection points appropriate (when the data was measured based on the study design)? Explain:
- Did the design minimize biases and threats to the internal and external validity of the study? Explain:
Population and Sample
- Was the population identified/ the sample described sufficiently? Explain:
- Was the best sampling design used to enhance representation of population? Explain:
- Was the sample size adequate? Explain:
Data collection and measurement
- Were the key variables measured using an appropriate method? Explain:
- Were the tools or instruments used adequately described and appropriately administered? Was the validity of the tools described? Explain:
- Did the report provide evidence that the data collection methods yielded data that were reliable and valid? Explain:
Procedures
2
Guide to an Overall Critique of a Quantitative Research Article Polit & Beck (2017) p 102-105
- If there was an intervention, was it adequately described and implemented? Explain:
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
- Were data collected in a manner that minimized bias? If more than one person collected data, was their training described? Explain:
| Results |
| Data Analysis |
- Were appropriate statistical methods used, given the level of measurement of the variables, number of groups being compared, and assumptions of the tests? Explain:
- Were type I and type II errors avoided or minimized? Explain:
- Were values missing? How were they evaluated and addressed? Explain:
Findings
- Was information about statistical significance presented? Information about effect size and precision of estimates? Explain:
- Were the findings adequately summarized, with good use of tables and figures? Explain:
| Discussion |
| Interpretation of the findings |
- Were all major findings interpreted and discussed? Explain:
30. Were causal inferences or correlation discussed? Explain:
31. Was the issue of clinical significance discussed? Explain:
32. Did the report address the issue of the generalizability of the findings? Explain: Implications/Recommendations - Did the researchers discuss the implications of the study for clinical practice or further research – and were those implications reasonable and complete? Explain:
- Was the report well-written, organized, and sufficiently detailed for critical analysis? Explain:
| General Issues |
| Presentation |
3
Guide to an Overall Critique of a Quantitative Research Article Polit & Beck (2017) p 102-105
- In intervention studies, was a CONSORT flowchart provided to show the flow of participants in the study? If does not apply, note that here:
- Was the report written in a manner that makes the findings accessible to practicing nurses? Explain:
Researcher Credibility
- Do the researchers’ clinical, substantive, or methodologic qualifications and experience enhance confidence in the findings and their interpretation?
Summary Assessment
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
Yes or No
When completed, add up the ‘yes’ answers. While still subjective, the greater number of ‘yes’ answers, the stronger the study is likely to be.
# Yes answers out of 38 possible
- Does the study contribute any meaningful evidence that can be used in nursing practice or that is useful to the nursing discipline?
| What is your overall assessment of this research article? |
