Critiquing research


Published on

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Critiquing research

  3. 3. WHAT IS RESEARCH CRITIQUE? • A critical evaluation / appraisal of a research report. 3
  4. 4. RESEARCH CRITIQUE – DEFINITION “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” - Burns, N. & Grove, S., 2005. 4
  5. 5. RESEARCH CRITIQUE … Requires • critical thinking, • appraisal & • intellectual skill 5
  6. 6. Importance of research critique • To broaden understanding for use in practice. • For implementing an evidencebased nursing practice. • Encourages nurses to participate in clinical inquiry and provide evidence for use in practice. 6
  7. 7. PURPOSES OF CRITIQUE • 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 7
  8. 8. APPROACHES FOR CRITIQUING  Principles  Be objective: make comments specific to the work you are reviewing  Be constructive: Critique should be an advisory and constructive nature 8
  9. 9. CRITIQUE PROCESS      Comprehension Comparison Analysis Evaluation Conceptual clustering 9
  10. 10. GENERAL GUIDELINES  Read & critique the entire study  Be objective & realistic  Comment on strengths and weakness  Give specific examples  Suggest alternatives 10
  11. 11. GENERAL GUIDELINES  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 11
  12. 12. INITIAL CRITIQUE  What type of study was conducted?  What was the setting?  Were the steps clearly identified?  Was there a logical flow? 12
  13. 13. ELEMENTS OF A RESEARCH CRITIQUE  Substantive & theoretical dimensions  Methodologic dimensions  Ethical dimensions  Interpretive dimensions  Presentation / stylistic dimensions 13
  14. 14. CRITERIA: INTRODUCTION  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? 14
  15. 15. PROBLEM STATEMENT  Is the problem statement clear?  Does the investigator identify key research questions and variables to be examined?  Does the study have the potential to help solve a problem that is currently faced in clinical practice? 15
  16. 16. LITERATURE REVIEW  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? 16
  17. 17. Theoretical/Conceptual Framework:  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? 17
  18. 18. RESEARCH QUESTIONS/HYPOTHESES  Are research questions or hypotheses formally stated?  Do the research questions and hypotheses naturally flow from the research problem and theoretical framework?  Does each research question or hypothesis contain at least two variables?  Are the research questions or hypotheses worded clearly and 18 objectively?
  19. 19. METHODOLOGY  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? 19
  20. 20. SAMPLE  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? 20
  21. 21. INSTRUMENTS  Are appropriate instruments for data collection used?  Are reliability and validity of the instruments adequate? 21
  22. 22. DATA ANALYSIS  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? 22
  23. 23. RESULTS  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? 23
  24. 24. Conclusions / discussion  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? 24
  25. 25. RESEARCH UTILIZATION IMPLICATIONS  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? 25
  27. 27. STATEMENT OF THE PHENOMENON OF INTEREST  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? 27
  28. 28. PURPOSE  Has the research made explicit the purpose of conducting the research?  Does the researcher describe the projected significance of the work to nursing? 28
  29. 29. METHOD  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? 29
  30. 30. SAMPLING  Does the researcher describe the selection of participants? Is purposive sampling used?  Are the informants who were chosen appropriate for research? 30
  31. 31. DATA COLLECTION  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 ? 31
  32. 32. 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? 32
  33. 33. DATA ANALYSIS  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? 33
  34. 34. FINDINGS  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? 34
  35. 35. CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION & RECOMMENDATIONS  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? 35
  36. 36. STYLES IN WRITING  More formal, impersonal fashion and use passive voice  Make concluding evaluation statement as to the overall worth and relevance of the study 36
  37. 37. So….  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 37
  38. 38. IN CONCLUSION….. A word about your style: let your presentation be well reasoned and objective. If you passionately disagree (or agree) with the author, let your passion inspire you to new heights of thorough research and reasoned argument. 38
  39. 39. REFERENCES • Burns N, Grove SK. The Practice of Nursing Research conduct, critique & utilization. 5 ed. W.B. Saunders Company: Philadelphia; 2005. • Bush CT. Nursing Research. 1 ed. Reston Publishing company: Inc. Virginia; 1985. • Hicks CM. Research Methods for Clinical Therapists – applied project design and analysis. 3 ed. Churchill Livingstone: London; 1999. • Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing Research Principles and Methods. 7 ed. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins company: Philadelphia; 2004. • Talbot LA. Principles and practice of Nursing Research. 1 ed. Mosby Year book Inc: St Louis; 1995. 39
  40. 40. THANK YOU 40