Read: Knowledge, attitude and practice in relation to catheter-associated urinary tract infection
prevention: A cross sectional study
Cited: Mong, I., Ramoo, V., Ponnampalavanar, S., Chong, M. C., & Wan Nawawi, W. N. F. (2022).
Knowledge, attitude and practice in relation to catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI)
prevention: A cross-sectional study. Journal of clinical nursing, 31(1-2), 209219.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15899
Answer:
1. Is the framework presented with clarity?. Is the framework linked to the research purpose? If no
theoretical framework identified, should there be? What framework might have been or could have
been used?
2. Identify the specific design of the study. Is the design appropriate for the study? Does the
sample fit with the research design and is the size sufficient? Was a data collection instrument
needed/used? How were data collected? Were reliability and validity accounted for?
3. Did the method used to gain study subjects coordinate with the study methodology? Was it
accurately and completely described?.
Read Knowledge attitude and practice in relation to cathet.pdf
1. Read: Knowledge, attitude and practice in relation to catheter-associated urinary tract infection
prevention: A cross sectional study
Cited: Mong, I., Ramoo, V., Ponnampalavanar, S., Chong, M. C., & Wan Nawawi, W. N. F. (2022).
Knowledge, attitude and practice in relation to catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI)
prevention: A cross-sectional study. Journal of clinical nursing, 31(1-2), 209219.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15899
Answer:
1. Is the framework presented with clarity?. Is the framework linked to the research purpose? If no
theoretical framework identified, should there be? What framework might have been or could have
been used?
2. Identify the specific design of the study. Is the design appropriate for the study? Does the
sample fit with the research design and is the size sufficient? Was a data collection instrument
needed/used? How were data collected? Were reliability and validity accounted for?
3. Did the method used to gain study subjects coordinate with the study methodology? Was it
accurately and completely described?
