Nursing Critique

1. Unit 7:
CRITIQUING
RESEARCH
Ms. Chanda Jabeen
Lecturer
RN, RM, BSN
M.Phil. Epidemiology & Public Health
PhD (Scholar) Epidemiology & Public Health

2. LEARNING OBJECTIVES
At the end of this lecture student will be able to
1. Define
I. Critique
II. Purpose of Critique
III. Importance of Critique
IV. Important guidelines regarding Critique
2. Explain quantitative nursing critique.
3. Explain qualitative nursing critique.

3. CRITIQUING RESEARCH

4. WHAT IS RESEARCH
CRITIQUE?
4
• A critical evaluation /
appraisal of a research
report.

5. RESEARCH CRITIQUE
– DEFINITION
5
“Systematic,unbiased,careful
examination of all aspects of a study to
judge the merits,limitations,meaning and
significance based on previous research
experience and knowledge of the topic”

6. Requires
• critical thinking,
• appraisal &
• intellectual skill
6
RESEARCH CRITIQUE …

7. Importance of research
critique
7
• To broaden understanding for use
in practice.
• For implementing an evidence-
based nursing practice.
• Encourages nurses to participate
in clinical inquiry and provide
evidence for use in practice.

8. PURPOSES OF CRITIQUE
8
• To assess students’ methodological
and analytical skills (identify
limitations & strengths).
• Seasoned researcher to help journal
editions
• Written critique is a guide to
researcher
• To advance nursing knowledge &
profession

9. APPROACHES FOR
CRITIQUING
9
 Principles
 Be objective: make
comments specific to the
work you are reviewing
 Be constructive: Critique
should be an advisory and
constructive nature

10. CRITIQUE PROCESS
10
 Comprehension
 Comparison
 Analysis
 Evaluation
 Conceptual clustering

11. GENERAL GUIDELINES
11
 Read & critique the entire
study
 Be objective & realistic
 Comment on strengths and
weakness
 Give specific examples
 Suggest alternatives

12. GENERAL GUIDELINES
12
 Use positive terms whenever
possible and say the positive
points first
 Avoid vague generalizations of
praise and fault findings
 Be sensitive in handling
negative comments
 Evaluate substantive, ethical,
methodologic, interpretative &
presentational dimensions

13. INITIAL CRITIQUE
13
 What type of study was
conducted?
 What was the setting?
 Were the steps clearly
identified?
 Was there a logical flow?

14. ELEMENTS OF A RESEARCH
CRITIQUE
14
 Substantive & theoretical
dimensions
 Methodologic dimensions
 Ethical dimensions
 Interpretive dimensions
 Presentation / stylistic dimensions

15. Quantitative Nursing
Critique

16. CRITERIA: INTRODUCTION
16
 Is the purpose of the study
presented?
 Is the significance (importance)
of the problem discussed?
 Does the investigator provide a
sense of what he or she is
doing and why?

17. PROBLEM STATEMENT
17
 Is the problem statement clear?
 Does the investigator identify
key research questions and
variables to be examined?
 Does the
potential to
study
help
have the
solve a
problem that is currently faced
in clinical practice?

18. LITERATURE REVIEW
18
 Does literature review follow a logical
sequence leading to a critical review
of supporting and conflicting prior
work?
 Is the relationship of the study to
previous research clear?
 Does the investigator describe gaps
in the literature and support the
necessity of the present study?

19. Theoretical/Conceptual
Framework:
19
 Check if conceptual framework described?
 If not, does it detract from the research?
 Are the concepts to be studied identified
and defined?
 Are measures for each of the concepts
identified and described?
 Does the research problem flow naturally
from the conceptual framework?

20. RESEARCH QUESTIONS/HYPOTHESES
objectively?
 Are research questions or hypotheses
formally stated?
hypotheses naturally flow from
 Do the research questions and
the
research problem and theoretical
framework?
research
contain
question or
at least two
 Does each
hypothesis
variables?
 Are the research
hypotheses worded
questions or
clearly and
18

21. METHODOLOGY
21
 Are the relevant variables and concepts clearly
and operationally defined?
 Is the design appropriate for the research
questions or hypotheses?
 Are methods of data collection sufficiently
described?
 What are the identified and potential threats to
internal and external validity that were present
in the study?
 If there was more than one data collector, was
the inter-rater reliability adequate?

22. SAMPLE
22
 Are the subjects and sampling
methods described?
 Is the sample of sufficient size for the
study, given the number of variables
and design?
 Is there adequate assurance that the
rights of human subjects were
protected?

23. INSTRUMENTS
23
 Are appropriate instruments for
data collection used?
 Are reliability and validity of the
instruments adequate?

24. DATA ANALYSIS
24
 Are the statistical tests used identified and
the values reported?
 Are appropriate statistics used, according to
level of measurement, sample size, sampling
method, and hypotheses / research
questions?

25. RESULTS
25
 Are the results for each hypothesis clearly
and objectively presented?
 Do the figures and tables illuminate the
presentation of results?
 Are results described in light of the
theoretical framework and supporting
literature?

26. Conclusions / discussion
26
 Are conclusions based on the results and
related to the hypotheses?
 Are study limitations identified?
 Are generalizations made within the scope of
the findings?
 Are implications of findings discussed (i.e.,
for practice, education and research)?
 Are recommendations for further research
stated?

27. RESEARCH UTILIZATION
IMPLICATIONS
27
 Is the study of sufficient quality to
meet the criterion of scientific merit?
 Does the study meet the criterion of
replicability?
 Is the study of relevance to practice?
 Is the study feasible for nurses to
implement?
 Do the benefits of the study outweigh
the risks?

28. Qualitative Nursing
Critique

29. STATEMENT OF THE
PHENOMENON OF INTEREST
29
 Is the phenomenon of interest
clearly identified?
 Has the researcher identified why
the phenomenon requires a
qualitative format?
 Has the research described the
philosophic underpinnings of the
research?

30. PURPOSE
30
 Has the research made explicit
the purpose of conducting the
research?
 Does the researcher describe the
projected significance of the
work to nursing?

31. METHOD
31
 Is the method used to collect data
compatible with the purpose of the
research?
 Is the method adequate to address the
phenomenon of interest?
 If a particular approach is used to
guide the inquiry, does the researcher
complete the study according to the
processes described?

32. SAMPLING
32
 Does the researcher describe
the selection of participants? Is
purposive sampling used?
 Are the informants who were
chosen appropriate for
research?

33. DATA COLLECTION
33
 Is data collection focused on human
experience?
 Does the researcher describe data
collection strategies (i.e. interview,
observation, field notes)?
 Is protection of human participants
addressed?
 Is saturation of the data described?
 Has the researcher made explicit the
procedures for collecting data ?

34. DATA ANALYSIS
 Does the researcher describe the
strategies used to analyze the data?
 Has the researcher remained true to the
data?
 Does the reader understand the
procedures used to analyze the data?
 Does researcher address the credibility,
auditability, and fittingness of the data?
34

35. DATA ANALYSIS
35
 Credibility
 Do the participants recognize the experience as
their own?
 Auditability
 Can the reader follow the researcher’s thinking?
 Does the researcher document the research
process?
 Fittingness
 Can the findings be applicable outside the study
situation?
 Are the results meaningful to individuals not
involved in the research?
 Is the strategy used for analysis compatible with
the purpose of the study?

36. FINDINGS
36
 Are the findings presented within a
context?
 Is the reader able to grasp the
essence of the experience from the
report of the findings?
 Are the researcher’s
conceptualization true to the data?
 Does the researcher place the report
in the context of what already is
known about the phenomenon?

37. CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION &
RECOMMENDATIONS
37
 Do the conclusions, implications and
recommendations give the reader a
context in which to use the findings?
 Do the conclusions reflect the study
findings?
 Does the researcher offer
recommendations for future study?
 Has the researcher made explicit the
significance of the study to nursing?

38. STYLES IN WRITING
38
 More formal, impersonal fashion and
use passive voice
 Make concluding evaluation statement
as to the overall worth and relevance
of the study

39. So….
39
 Research is the best possible means of
answering many questions, no single
study can provide conclusive evidence
 Evidence is accumulated through the
conduct & evaluation of several
studies
 Reader who can do reflective and
thorough critiques of research reports
play a role in advancing nursing
knowledge

40. A word about
IN CONCLUSION…..
40
style:your
well reasoned
let your
andpresentation be
objective. If you passionately disagree
(or agree) with the author, let your
passion inspire you to new heights of
research and reasonedthorough
argument.

41. REFERENCE
Grove,S.K.,Gray, R.J.,& Burns, N.(2015).Understanding
Nursing research building an evidence- based
practice(6thed.).St. Louis: Elsevier Health Sciences

42. THANK YOU
42