JOURNAL CRITIQUE
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•17 views
The document discusses the process of critically appraising a journal article by asking six key questions: 1) what is the clinical question? 2) why was the question asked? 3) what methods were used? 4) what were the results? 5) what conclusions were drawn? 6) how should the information be applied? It emphasizes evaluating validity, bias, and significance to determine if the study changes clinical practice. The anatomy of a scientific article and tips for organizing a review are also reviewed.
Report
Share
Report
Share
Recommended
Critically_Appraising_a_Journal_Article_ Student_Version.pptx
A journal club is an educational meeting where a group reads, evaluates, and discusses current articles from the biomedical literature. It provides a forum for professionals and students to critically evaluate evidence and keep up with the latest research. The first documented journal club was formed in the mid-1800s in London by Sir James Paget and colleagues to read and discuss medical journals. However, the first formal journal club is widely considered to be established by Sir William Osler at McGill University in 1875. Successful journal clubs involve formulating a clear clinical question, searching for relevant evidence, critically appraising the evidence, and discussing implications for practice.
Evaulating research articles
This document provides a checklist for evaluating research articles by examining several components of a research paper, including the title, abstract, introduction, literature review, samples, instruments, methods, analysis, results, and discussion sections. The checklist contains over 100 questions to consider for each section to help determine if the key elements of the research study and its findings are clearly described and presented. The goal is to effectively evaluate the research and make meaning from what is read within the time available.
Critiquing and evaluating health literature and manuscripts
This document discusses how to critique and evaluate health literature and manuscripts. It provides elements to consider when critiquing a research study, including evaluating the study purpose, research design, literature review, research questions/hypotheses, study sample, data collection, results, analysis, recommendations and conclusions. It also introduces the STROBE checklist, which provides guidance on reporting observational studies to ensure transparency.
Research Critique.pptx
This document provides guidance on how to conduct a critical appraisal or critique of a research report. It emphasizes that a critique requires careful examination of all aspects of a study, including its methodology, analysis, and conclusions. The critique should objectively assess both the strengths and limitations of the research. Key aspects that should be evaluated include the study's design, sampling approach, data collection and analysis methods, and whether ethical standards were upheld. The critique aims to advance scientific knowledge by helping to identify ways future studies could be improved.
Critique Template for a Mixed-Methods StudyNURS 5052NURS 6052.docx
Critique Template for a Mixed-Methods Study
NURS 5052/NURS 6052
Week 6 Assignment: Application: Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies (due by Day 7 of Week 7)
Date:
FORMTEXT
Your name:
FORMTEXT
Article reference (in APA style):
FORMTEXT
URL:
FORMTEXT
What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study.
When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these:
· Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation?
· What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness?
· How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice?
To help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research study of your choice.
If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor.
MIXED-METHODS RESEARCH CRITIQUE
1. Research Issue and Purpose
What is the research question or issue of the referenced study? What is its purpose? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the question must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.)
1. Researcher Pre-understandings and / or Hypotheses and Research Questions
Does the article include a discussion of the researcher’s pre-understandings? What does the article disclose about the researcher’s professional and personal perspectives on the research problem? What are the hypotheses (or research questions/objectives) of the study? (Sometimes the hypotheses or study questions are listed in the Results section, rather than preceding the report of the methodology used. Occasionally, there will be no mention of hypotheses, but anytime there are inferential statistics used, the reader can recognize what the hypotheses are from looking at the results of statistical analysis.)
2. Literature Review
What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current, relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.)
3. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework
Is a theoretical or conceptual fra.
Research Critique
This document provides an outline for critiquing a research study. It includes sections to evaluate the problem statement, literature review, research design, instruments, data analysis, and conclusions. The critique examines aspects like variable definitions, sampling methods, reliability and validity of tools, appropriate use of statistics, and implications of the findings. The overall goal is to provide a systematic analysis of the strengths and limitations of the research.
Critique Template for a Mixed-Methods StudyNURS 6052Week 6 A.docx
Critique Template for a Mixed-Methods Study
NURS 6052
Week 6 Assignment: Application: Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies (due by Day 7 of Week 7)
Date:
FORMTEXT
Your name:
FORMTEXT
Article reference (in APA style):
FORMTEXT
URL:
FORMTEXT
What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study.
When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these:
· Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation?
· What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness?
· How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice?
To help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research study of your choice.
If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor.
MIXED-METHODS RESEARCH CRITIQUE
1. Research Issue and Purpose
What is the research question or issue of the referenced study? What is its purpose? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the question must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.)
1. Researcher Pre-understandings and / or Hypotheses and Research Questions
Does the article include a discussion of the researcher’s pre-understandings? What does the article disclose about the researcher’s professional and personal perspectives on the research problem? What are the hypotheses (or research questions/objectives) of the study? (Sometimes the hypotheses or study questions are listed in the Results section, rather than preceding the report of the methodology used. Occasionally, there will be no mention of hypotheses, but anytime there are inferential statistics used, the reader can recognize what the hypotheses are from looking at the results of statistical analysis.)
2. Literature Review
What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current, relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.)
3. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework
Is a theoretical or conceptual framework ide.
Research method ch02 structure of thesis
This document provides an overview of the typical structure and components of a research paper, including:
1) An abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion section.
2) Guidance on what information should be included in each section, such as stating the objectives in the introduction and only reporting objective results in the results section.
3) Examples of how to write certain parts, like indicating the limitations of a study in the discussion rather than providing an excessive list.
Recommended
Critically_Appraising_a_Journal_Article_ Student_Version.pptx
A journal club is an educational meeting where a group reads, evaluates, and discusses current articles from the biomedical literature. It provides a forum for professionals and students to critically evaluate evidence and keep up with the latest research. The first documented journal club was formed in the mid-1800s in London by Sir James Paget and colleagues to read and discuss medical journals. However, the first formal journal club is widely considered to be established by Sir William Osler at McGill University in 1875. Successful journal clubs involve formulating a clear clinical question, searching for relevant evidence, critically appraising the evidence, and discussing implications for practice.
Evaulating research articles
This document provides a checklist for evaluating research articles by examining several components of a research paper, including the title, abstract, introduction, literature review, samples, instruments, methods, analysis, results, and discussion sections. The checklist contains over 100 questions to consider for each section to help determine if the key elements of the research study and its findings are clearly described and presented. The goal is to effectively evaluate the research and make meaning from what is read within the time available.
Critiquing and evaluating health literature and manuscripts
This document discusses how to critique and evaluate health literature and manuscripts. It provides elements to consider when critiquing a research study, including evaluating the study purpose, research design, literature review, research questions/hypotheses, study sample, data collection, results, analysis, recommendations and conclusions. It also introduces the STROBE checklist, which provides guidance on reporting observational studies to ensure transparency.
Research Critique.pptx
This document provides guidance on how to conduct a critical appraisal or critique of a research report. It emphasizes that a critique requires careful examination of all aspects of a study, including its methodology, analysis, and conclusions. The critique should objectively assess both the strengths and limitations of the research. Key aspects that should be evaluated include the study's design, sampling approach, data collection and analysis methods, and whether ethical standards were upheld. The critique aims to advance scientific knowledge by helping to identify ways future studies could be improved.
Critique Template for a Mixed-Methods StudyNURS 5052NURS 6052.docx
Critique Template for a Mixed-Methods Study
NURS 5052/NURS 6052
Week 6 Assignment: Application: Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies (due by Day 7 of Week 7)
Date:
FORMTEXT
Your name:
FORMTEXT
Article reference (in APA style):
FORMTEXT
URL:
FORMTEXT
What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study.
When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these:
· Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation?
· What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness?
· How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice?
To help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research study of your choice.
If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor.
MIXED-METHODS RESEARCH CRITIQUE
1. Research Issue and Purpose
What is the research question or issue of the referenced study? What is its purpose? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the question must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.)
1. Researcher Pre-understandings and / or Hypotheses and Research Questions
Does the article include a discussion of the researcher’s pre-understandings? What does the article disclose about the researcher’s professional and personal perspectives on the research problem? What are the hypotheses (or research questions/objectives) of the study? (Sometimes the hypotheses or study questions are listed in the Results section, rather than preceding the report of the methodology used. Occasionally, there will be no mention of hypotheses, but anytime there are inferential statistics used, the reader can recognize what the hypotheses are from looking at the results of statistical analysis.)
2. Literature Review
What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current, relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.)
3. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework
Is a theoretical or conceptual fra.
Research Critique
This document provides an outline for critiquing a research study. It includes sections to evaluate the problem statement, literature review, research design, instruments, data analysis, and conclusions. The critique examines aspects like variable definitions, sampling methods, reliability and validity of tools, appropriate use of statistics, and implications of the findings. The overall goal is to provide a systematic analysis of the strengths and limitations of the research.
Critique Template for a Mixed-Methods StudyNURS 6052Week 6 A.docx
Critique Template for a Mixed-Methods Study
NURS 6052
Week 6 Assignment: Application: Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies (due by Day 7 of Week 7)
Date:
FORMTEXT
Your name:
FORMTEXT
Article reference (in APA style):
FORMTEXT
URL:
FORMTEXT
What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study.
When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these:
· Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation?
· What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness?
· How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice?
To help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research study of your choice.
If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor.
MIXED-METHODS RESEARCH CRITIQUE
1. Research Issue and Purpose
What is the research question or issue of the referenced study? What is its purpose? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the question must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.)
1. Researcher Pre-understandings and / or Hypotheses and Research Questions
Does the article include a discussion of the researcher’s pre-understandings? What does the article disclose about the researcher’s professional and personal perspectives on the research problem? What are the hypotheses (or research questions/objectives) of the study? (Sometimes the hypotheses or study questions are listed in the Results section, rather than preceding the report of the methodology used. Occasionally, there will be no mention of hypotheses, but anytime there are inferential statistics used, the reader can recognize what the hypotheses are from looking at the results of statistical analysis.)
2. Literature Review
What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current, relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.)
3. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework
Is a theoretical or conceptual framework ide.
Research method ch02 structure of thesis
This document provides an overview of the typical structure and components of a research paper, including:
1) An abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion section.
2) Guidance on what information should be included in each section, such as stating the objectives in the introduction and only reporting objective results in the results section.
3) Examples of how to write certain parts, like indicating the limitations of a study in the discussion rather than providing an excessive list.
How to Critique a Research paper
1. The document provides guidelines for critiquing a research paper, outlining major sections to evaluate such as the problem statement, literature review, hypotheses, sample, research design, instruments, data analysis, and conclusions.
2. Key areas to assess include whether the relationships between variables are clearly defined, the sample and design are appropriate, reliability and validity of instruments is reported, and statistical analysis and conclusions follow from the study design and results.
3. The guidelines are intended to help critically evaluate how well a research paper is designed and conducted.
(1) Critique Template for a Qualitative StudyNURS 6052Week.docx
(1): Critique Template for a Qualitative Study
NURS 6052
Week 6 Assignment: Application: Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies (due by Day 7 of Week 7)
Date:
Your name:
Article reference (in APA style):
URL:
What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study.
When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these:
· Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation?
· What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness?
· How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice?
To help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research study of your choice.
If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor.
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE
1. Research Issue and Purpose
What is the research question or issue of the referenced study? What is its purpose? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the question must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.)
2. Researcher Pre-understandings
Does the article include a discussion of the researcher’s pre-understandings? What does the article disclose about the researcher’s professional and personal perspectives on the research problem?
3. Literature Review
What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current, relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.)
4. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework
Is a theoretical or conceptual framework identified? If so, what is it? Is it a nursing framework or one drawn from another discipline? (Sometimes there is no explicitly identified theoretical or conceptual framework; in addition, many “nursing” research studies draw on a “borrowed” framework, e.g., stress, medical pathology, etc.)
5. Participants
Who were the participants? Is the setting or study group adequately described? Is the setting appropriate for the research question? What type of sampling strategy was used? Was it appropriate? Was the sample size adequate? Did t ...
Research critique
Critiquing research studies and articles is one of the method to improve the quality of research projects and it is also a method to learn research methodology for beginners.
MELJUN CORTES research seminar_1_selecting_a_problem_and_reviewing_the_research
The document discusses selecting a research problem and reviewing literature. It advises choosing a problem that interests you and is doable. Falling in love with your first idea can be risky, so consider alternatives. Review general sources to explore topics before examining secondary sources that summarize research and primary sources with specific studies. Carefully evaluate research by considering factors like the problem, hypotheses, methods, and results. Ethical research requires protecting participants and obtaining informed consent. The literature review should have a unified theme and be organized with an outline.
What reasons do the authors give for conducting this research stud.docx
What reasons do the authors give for conducting this research study?
The Introduction ends with a hypothesis, or a prediction, about what the authors will find in the study. Using your own words, what is the hypothesis?
Describe the participants in the study - what were the participants’ demographic characteristics?
What variables are being studied?
What procedure did the authors use in this study to collect data?
What kind of data was presented in the results section? Were there averages (means), correlations, or statistical tests?
What did the author find – what was concluded from the data analyses? Was the hypothesis supported?
What are some of the limitations to the study that the authors noted?
What are some of the authors’ suggestions for future research studies that can follow up this study?
Why is this research important?
What terms are difficult to understand?
What questions do you have about this article?
What do you think about this research – would you apply the results to yourself?
...
Research Critique
This document outlines the criteria for critiquing a research study. It breaks the critique down into 12 sections: (1) problem statement and purpose, (2) literature review and theoretical framework, (3) hypotheses/research questions, (4) sample, (5) research design, (6) instruments, (7) data analysis, (8) conclusions/implications. Each section lists several questions to guide the evaluation of that aspect of the study, such as whether the problem statement specifies the variables and population, if the sample and design match the problem/purpose, and if the conclusions are supported by the results. The overall purpose is to provide a systematic way to assess the strengths and limitations of a research undertaking.
critica apprasial (1).pptx
This document provides guidelines for critically appraising a research article or study. It outlines key areas to examine such as the title, abstract, research problem and questions, objectives, hypotheses, study design, population, data collection, methodology, sampling methods, controls, ethical considerations, and conclusions. Critically evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of a study is essential to determine how its findings should influence decision making and if the results are valid and consistent with other research. The critical appraisal process is a fundamental skill for assessing clinical research quality and relevance.
Running head RESEARCH CRITIQUE & PICOT - FINAL 16RE.docx
Running head: RESEARCH CRITIQUE & PICOT - FINAL 1
6
RESEARCH CRITIQUE & PICOT
Research Critique & PICOT Statement – Final Draft
Student’s Name
NRS-433V Introduction to Nursing Research
Grand Canyon University
Due Date
Research Critique & PICOT Statement - Final Draft
Give a brief introduction of this paper as it is the final draft. In this section include the names of the studies that were critiqued in the qualitative and quantitative sections below with the cited reference after the name of each study. The graded assignments from weeks one, two and three should be the basis for this assignment. The corrections made for all sections of those assignments according to the instructor’s comments should be clearly present. Do not include the instructor’s comments. Just make the corrections and put them in the proper places noted by the headings below. Throughout this paper, you should use spell check and grammar check always. Speak in the active voice and not a passive voice. Support statements with references. Use citations in all sections when references are made to the study or studies used in this paper. (Keep the word count between 1500 and 1750 words. Going outside of the word count will cause a 10% deduction of total points.)
Nursing Practice Problem and PICOT Statement
Nursing Practice Problem
State the practice problem that is relevant to nursing. This should be an extension of the PICOT question that was in the introduction of the literature Search on Week 1 of this class. The PICOT question should support the nursing practice problem with current research. Be clear, concise and relate the problem to nursing practice. State how current research supports this problem. Describe the relevant details and explain how the PICOT statement is linked or related to nursing practice. Current research must be used to show how the PICOT supports the nursing practice problem.
PICOT Statement
State the PICOT statement in a question. State the PICOT question using the format noted in the article on “EBP- Step-by-Step- Asking the Clinical Question: A Key Step in Evidence-Based Practice” by Stillwell, Fineout-Overhold & Melnyk (2010) found with the template for this assignment. Discuss the link betweenthe PICOT question, the nursing practice problem & evidence-based practice change how they are connected to relevant details supporting explanation.
Qualitative Study
Background of Study
Keep this section to just the criteria of the qualitative study. The clinical and research problem of the study, significance of the study, purpose of the study and main research question or hypothesis should be described briefly in this section.
Methods of Study
What qualitative methods were used to answer the research question stated above? Were there quantitative and qualitative studies of the literature review relevant to the focus of the study that were cited by the author? Were the references current? Were there weaknesses of the available studies us.
Critique
This document provides guidance on how to effectively review academic research papers. It outlines that a review should:
1) Objectively evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the paper through a planned, critical analysis.
2) Be balanced and provide alternative suggestions to improve the work.
3) Make recommendations to the editorial board about rejecting or accepting the paper based on its relevancy.
Critique Template for a Qualitative StudyCritiquing Qualit.docx
Critique Template for a Qualitative Study
Critiquing Qualitative
What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study.
When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these:
Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation?
What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness?
How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice?
To help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research study of your choice.
If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must
e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor.
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE
Research Issue and Purpose
What is the research question or issue of the referenced study? What is its purpose? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the question must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.)
Researcher Pre-understandings
Does the article include a discussion of the researcher’s pre-understandings? What does the article disclose about the researcher’s professional and personal perspectives on the research problem?
Literature Review
What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current, relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.)
Theoretical or Conceptual Framework
Is a theoretical or conceptual framework identified? If so, what is it? Is it a nursing framework or one drawn from another discipline? (Sometimes there is no explicitly identified theoretical or conceptual framework; in addition, many “nursing” research studies draw on a “borrowed” framework, e.g., stress, medical pathology, etc.)
Participants
Who were the participants? Is the setting or study group adequately described? Is the setting appropriate for the research question? What type of sampling strategy was used? Was it appropriate? Was the sample size adequate? Did the researcher stipulate that information redundancy was achieved?
Protection of Human Research Participants
What steps were taken to protect human research subjects?
.
Nr 1 in 1
This document provides an introduction to nursing research. It defines research as a systematic and objective analysis that may lead to new principles or theories. The characteristics of good research include generating knowledge, being empirical and replicable. The purposes of nursing research are to develop nursing theory, improve patient care, and for nurses to adopt evidence-based practice. The types of research discussed are theoretical/applied and preventive/therapeutic research. Basic research terms are also defined such as discovery, invention, and innovation. The document concludes by listing key research terminology and assigning activities and references for further learning.
MSN5300 Advanced Nursing Inquiry.docx
MSN5300: Advanced Nursing Inquiry, Research, and Evidence-Based Practice Team:____________
Critical Appraisal Worksheet for Group Project 2, Part b
Elements of Appraisal
Discussion
Study Design
Was the study a qualitative or quantitative design? Explain.
Practice Problem
State the practice problem/issue that is the focus of the study.
How does this practice problem/issue affect
your nursing practice?
Study Purpose
State the purpose of the study.
Discuss whether this study was feasible to conduct in terms of money commitment; the researchers' expertise; availability of subjects, and ethical considerations.
Review of Literature
Was the literature review organized to show the progressive development of evidence from previous research?
Was a clear, concise summary presented of the current empirical and theoretical knowledge in the area of the study?
Did the literature review summary identify what was known and not known about the research problem? Did it logically direct the research purpose?
Theoretical Framework
Is a conceptual model or theoretical framework used? If so, is it presented with clarity? Does it adequately explain the phenomenon of concern?
Is the framework linked to the research purpose? If not, would another framework fit more logically with the study?
If a proposition or relationship from a theory is to be tested, is the proposition clearly identified and linked to the study hypothesis?
Research Question(s) and Hpothesis(es)
What is the research question? Is it clearly stated?
Does the research question match the purpose of the study?
What is the research hypothesis? Is it clearly stated?
Does the hypothesis match the purpose of the study?
Formulate a null hypothesis for this study.
Were the objectives, questions, or hypotheses logically linked to the concepts and relationships (propositions) in the framework? Explain.
Variables
List all research variables with corresponding levels of measurement on the NOIR scale.
Do variables represent the concepts identified in the framework?
How is each study variable defined (both conceptually
and operationally)?
Are conceptual definitions of variables consistent with operational definitions?
Study Design
What was the design was used in the study? Was it the most appropriate design to answer the study question? Explain.
Was the design logically linked to the sampling method and statistical analyses?
Did the design provide a means to examine
all objectives, questions, or hypotheses?
If there was an intervention (treatment) in the study:
· what was the intervention? was it clearly described?
· was the treatment appropriate for examining the study purpose and hypotheses?
· did the study framework explain the links between the treatment (independent variab.
research critique_in nursing education.pptx
This document outlines the elements that should be included in a research critique. It defines a research critique as a systematic way to objectively review a research study to identify its strengths and weaknesses. The principles of a good critique are that it should be objective, constructive, balanced, and communicate effectively. Key elements that should be evaluated in a research study include the title, abstract, introduction, design, sample, data collection tools, analysis, results, discussion, conclusions, and recommendations. A strong critique evaluates whether these elements of the study are clearly described and appropriate.
Developing a Systematic Review Topic and Research Question - Dr Buna Bhandari
The document provides guidance on developing research questions for systematic reviews. It discusses identifying gaps in existing literature, generating topic ideas, and developing focused questions using frameworks like PICO. Key points include:
- Systematic reviews aim to summarize all evidence on a research question in a transparent, replicable manner.
- Developing a clear, answerable research question is the foundation for any systematic review.
- Potential topics can come from reviewing literature, expertise, or consulting experts. Gaps in existing knowledge should be identified.
- Questions should be feasible, interesting, novel, ethical, and relevant. Frameworks like PICO can help formulate focused questions.
Research Overview
The document provides an overview of research methodology in 9 steps:
1. Identifying an area of interest or problem to study.
2. Conducting a literature review to understand previous work.
3. Defining clear objectives based on gaps in knowledge.
4. Developing a methodology to achieve the objectives, including study design.
5. Stating a hypothesis or research question.
6. Establishing the importance and rationale of the study.
7. Creating a detailed methodology plan involving statistics experts.
8. Ensuring valid conclusions can be drawn from the methods.
9. Determining feasibility considering time, resources, and necessary approvals.
Fundamentals of Scientific Research: An Overview
Research Basics
Fundamentals of Scientific Research
Research Methodology
Unpacking Nutrition Research and being an effective Science Communicator
Understand what can make nutrition research confusing in the conclusions it reaches and appreciate the key questions to ask when critiquing a research study. Then discover the principles of clear and effective science communication and how to maintain credibility and engage people in different ways on social media,
Critique Template for a Qualitative StudyNURS 5052NURS 6052We.docx
Critique Template for a Qualitative Study
NURS 5052/NURS 6052
Week 6 Assignment: Application: Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies (due by Day 7 of Week 7)
Date:
FORMTEXT
Your name:
FORMTEXT
Article reference (in APA style):
FORMTEXT
URL:
FORMTEXT
What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study.
When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these:
· Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation?
· What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness?
· How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice?
To help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research study of your choice.
If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor.
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE
1. Research Issue and Purpose
What is the research question or issue of the referenced study? What is its purpose? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the question must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.)
2. Researcher Pre-understandings
Does the article include a discussion of the researcher’s pre-understandings? What does the article disclose about the researcher’s professional and personal perspectives on the research problem?
3. Literature Review
What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current, relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.)
4. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework
Is a theoretical or conceptual framework identified? If so, what is it? Is it a nursing framework or one drawn from another discipline? (Sometimes there is no explicitly identified theoretical or conceptual framework; in addition, many “nursing” research studies draw on a “borrowed” framework, e.g., stress, medical pathology, etc.)
5. Participants
Who were the participants? Is the setting or study group adequately described? Is the setting appropriate for the research question? What type of.
Peer review explained: Ayurveda Context
This document discusses the peer review process for Ayurveda research publications. It covers what peer review is, specific points reviewers examine in manuscripts, strengths and weaknesses of peer review, and common problems with Ayurveda manuscripts. Peer review aims to select quality research for publication and funding by having experts evaluate manuscripts. Reviewers check that studies are scientifically sound and address important problems. However, peer review also has weaknesses like bias, and Ayurveda research faces issues like limited specialized journals and unfamiliarity with international standards. The document advocates for training researchers in writing for publication and following reporting guidelines to strengthen Ayurveda research.
For this assignment you willwrite a paper using TOPIC 1 QUANTITAT.docx
For this assignment you willwrite a paper using TOPIC 1: QUANTITATIVERESEARCH &TOPIC 2:QUALITATIVE RESEARCH. Do not worry about the word count as this is not part of the grading criteria for this assignment. Below is a template of how the paper should be setup. This paper will be in APA format. In the template below I am providing a sample of the headers that should be used in APA format to organize your paper. I would highly recommend using them in your paper.
The introduction should introduce the paper. The intro would also include your thesis statement. The thesis tells the reader what will be discussed in the rest of the paper. This section should be in first paragraphs.
PICOT Statement
Revise the PICOT statement you wrote - PICOT Statements: (1). Changes in leisure time physical activity preference and development of hypertension were significantly correlated, especially among urban Chinese. Hypertension prevention programs may identify the groups at elevated risk by examining levels and changes of LTPA preferences. (2). Hypertension is a major health concern that leads to many complications besides the heart attack, heart failure and other related issues. Therefore, this study will help in studying the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) so as to arrive at the solutions. The study will aim at answering the question, how to treat to lower systolic blood pressure. (3). There are several reasons that contributed to non-adherence to treatment in hypertensive patients. Diversity of these reasons is an indication that design and implementation of different kinds of interventions are required in order to increase the patients' awareness, empower them and encourage self-efficacy.” Based on these provide justification of the problem and supporting evidence from multiple resources to justify why this is a problem. This section should be 1-2 paragraphs.
Research Critiques
Use the research critiques to complete this assignment that has both qualitative and quantitative.
Qualitative Studies
Background of the study. Answer the following questions in narrative form regarding the qualitative studies in this section.
· Identify the clinical problem and research problem that led to the study. What was not known about the clinical problem that, if understood, could be used to improve health care delivery or patient outcomes? This gap in knowledge is the research problem.
· How did the author establish the significance of the study? In other words, why should the reader care about this study? Look for statements about human suffering, costs of treatment, or the number of people affected by the clinical problem.
· Identify the purpose of the study. An author may clearly state the purpose of the study or may describe the purpose as the study goals, objectives, or aims.
· List research questions that the study was designed to answer. If the author does not explicitly provide the questions, attempt to infer the questions from the answers.
.
Top Effective Soaps for Fungal Skin Infections in India
Swisschem Dermacare has mentioned the List of The Best Antifungal Soap In India 2022. All of these soaps are trusted by various Dermatology Experts.
More Related Content
Similar to JOURNAL CRITIQUE
How to Critique a Research paper
1. The document provides guidelines for critiquing a research paper, outlining major sections to evaluate such as the problem statement, literature review, hypotheses, sample, research design, instruments, data analysis, and conclusions.
2. Key areas to assess include whether the relationships between variables are clearly defined, the sample and design are appropriate, reliability and validity of instruments is reported, and statistical analysis and conclusions follow from the study design and results.
3. The guidelines are intended to help critically evaluate how well a research paper is designed and conducted.
(1) Critique Template for a Qualitative StudyNURS 6052Week.docx
(1): Critique Template for a Qualitative Study
NURS 6052
Week 6 Assignment: Application: Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies (due by Day 7 of Week 7)
Date:
Your name:
Article reference (in APA style):
URL:
What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study.
When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these:
· Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation?
· What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness?
· How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice?
To help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research study of your choice.
If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor.
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE
1. Research Issue and Purpose
What is the research question or issue of the referenced study? What is its purpose? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the question must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.)
2. Researcher Pre-understandings
Does the article include a discussion of the researcher’s pre-understandings? What does the article disclose about the researcher’s professional and personal perspectives on the research problem?
3. Literature Review
What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current, relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.)
4. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework
Is a theoretical or conceptual framework identified? If so, what is it? Is it a nursing framework or one drawn from another discipline? (Sometimes there is no explicitly identified theoretical or conceptual framework; in addition, many “nursing” research studies draw on a “borrowed” framework, e.g., stress, medical pathology, etc.)
5. Participants
Who were the participants? Is the setting or study group adequately described? Is the setting appropriate for the research question? What type of sampling strategy was used? Was it appropriate? Was the sample size adequate? Did t ...
Research critique
Critiquing research studies and articles is one of the method to improve the quality of research projects and it is also a method to learn research methodology for beginners.
MELJUN CORTES research seminar_1_selecting_a_problem_and_reviewing_the_research
The document discusses selecting a research problem and reviewing literature. It advises choosing a problem that interests you and is doable. Falling in love with your first idea can be risky, so consider alternatives. Review general sources to explore topics before examining secondary sources that summarize research and primary sources with specific studies. Carefully evaluate research by considering factors like the problem, hypotheses, methods, and results. Ethical research requires protecting participants and obtaining informed consent. The literature review should have a unified theme and be organized with an outline.
What reasons do the authors give for conducting this research stud.docx
What reasons do the authors give for conducting this research study?
The Introduction ends with a hypothesis, or a prediction, about what the authors will find in the study. Using your own words, what is the hypothesis?
Describe the participants in the study - what were the participants’ demographic characteristics?
What variables are being studied?
What procedure did the authors use in this study to collect data?
What kind of data was presented in the results section? Were there averages (means), correlations, or statistical tests?
What did the author find – what was concluded from the data analyses? Was the hypothesis supported?
What are some of the limitations to the study that the authors noted?
What are some of the authors’ suggestions for future research studies that can follow up this study?
Why is this research important?
What terms are difficult to understand?
What questions do you have about this article?
What do you think about this research – would you apply the results to yourself?
...
Research Critique
This document outlines the criteria for critiquing a research study. It breaks the critique down into 12 sections: (1) problem statement and purpose, (2) literature review and theoretical framework, (3) hypotheses/research questions, (4) sample, (5) research design, (6) instruments, (7) data analysis, (8) conclusions/implications. Each section lists several questions to guide the evaluation of that aspect of the study, such as whether the problem statement specifies the variables and population, if the sample and design match the problem/purpose, and if the conclusions are supported by the results. The overall purpose is to provide a systematic way to assess the strengths and limitations of a research undertaking.
critica apprasial (1).pptx
This document provides guidelines for critically appraising a research article or study. It outlines key areas to examine such as the title, abstract, research problem and questions, objectives, hypotheses, study design, population, data collection, methodology, sampling methods, controls, ethical considerations, and conclusions. Critically evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of a study is essential to determine how its findings should influence decision making and if the results are valid and consistent with other research. The critical appraisal process is a fundamental skill for assessing clinical research quality and relevance.
Running head RESEARCH CRITIQUE & PICOT - FINAL 16RE.docx
Running head: RESEARCH CRITIQUE & PICOT - FINAL 1
6
RESEARCH CRITIQUE & PICOT
Research Critique & PICOT Statement – Final Draft
Student’s Name
NRS-433V Introduction to Nursing Research
Grand Canyon University
Due Date
Research Critique & PICOT Statement - Final Draft
Give a brief introduction of this paper as it is the final draft. In this section include the names of the studies that were critiqued in the qualitative and quantitative sections below with the cited reference after the name of each study. The graded assignments from weeks one, two and three should be the basis for this assignment. The corrections made for all sections of those assignments according to the instructor’s comments should be clearly present. Do not include the instructor’s comments. Just make the corrections and put them in the proper places noted by the headings below. Throughout this paper, you should use spell check and grammar check always. Speak in the active voice and not a passive voice. Support statements with references. Use citations in all sections when references are made to the study or studies used in this paper. (Keep the word count between 1500 and 1750 words. Going outside of the word count will cause a 10% deduction of total points.)
Nursing Practice Problem and PICOT Statement
Nursing Practice Problem
State the practice problem that is relevant to nursing. This should be an extension of the PICOT question that was in the introduction of the literature Search on Week 1 of this class. The PICOT question should support the nursing practice problem with current research. Be clear, concise and relate the problem to nursing practice. State how current research supports this problem. Describe the relevant details and explain how the PICOT statement is linked or related to nursing practice. Current research must be used to show how the PICOT supports the nursing practice problem.
PICOT Statement
State the PICOT statement in a question. State the PICOT question using the format noted in the article on “EBP- Step-by-Step- Asking the Clinical Question: A Key Step in Evidence-Based Practice” by Stillwell, Fineout-Overhold & Melnyk (2010) found with the template for this assignment. Discuss the link betweenthe PICOT question, the nursing practice problem & evidence-based practice change how they are connected to relevant details supporting explanation.
Qualitative Study
Background of Study
Keep this section to just the criteria of the qualitative study. The clinical and research problem of the study, significance of the study, purpose of the study and main research question or hypothesis should be described briefly in this section.
Methods of Study
What qualitative methods were used to answer the research question stated above? Were there quantitative and qualitative studies of the literature review relevant to the focus of the study that were cited by the author? Were the references current? Were there weaknesses of the available studies us.
Critique
This document provides guidance on how to effectively review academic research papers. It outlines that a review should:
1) Objectively evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the paper through a planned, critical analysis.
2) Be balanced and provide alternative suggestions to improve the work.
3) Make recommendations to the editorial board about rejecting or accepting the paper based on its relevancy.
Critique Template for a Qualitative StudyCritiquing Qualit.docx
Critique Template for a Qualitative Study
Critiquing Qualitative
What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study.
When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these:
Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation?
What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness?
How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice?
To help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research study of your choice.
If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must
e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor.
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE
Research Issue and Purpose
What is the research question or issue of the referenced study? What is its purpose? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the question must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.)
Researcher Pre-understandings
Does the article include a discussion of the researcher’s pre-understandings? What does the article disclose about the researcher’s professional and personal perspectives on the research problem?
Literature Review
What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current, relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.)
Theoretical or Conceptual Framework
Is a theoretical or conceptual framework identified? If so, what is it? Is it a nursing framework or one drawn from another discipline? (Sometimes there is no explicitly identified theoretical or conceptual framework; in addition, many “nursing” research studies draw on a “borrowed” framework, e.g., stress, medical pathology, etc.)
Participants
Who were the participants? Is the setting or study group adequately described? Is the setting appropriate for the research question? What type of sampling strategy was used? Was it appropriate? Was the sample size adequate? Did the researcher stipulate that information redundancy was achieved?
Protection of Human Research Participants
What steps were taken to protect human research subjects?
.
Nr 1 in 1
This document provides an introduction to nursing research. It defines research as a systematic and objective analysis that may lead to new principles or theories. The characteristics of good research include generating knowledge, being empirical and replicable. The purposes of nursing research are to develop nursing theory, improve patient care, and for nurses to adopt evidence-based practice. The types of research discussed are theoretical/applied and preventive/therapeutic research. Basic research terms are also defined such as discovery, invention, and innovation. The document concludes by listing key research terminology and assigning activities and references for further learning.
MSN5300 Advanced Nursing Inquiry.docx
MSN5300: Advanced Nursing Inquiry, Research, and Evidence-Based Practice Team:____________
Critical Appraisal Worksheet for Group Project 2, Part b
Elements of Appraisal
Discussion
Study Design
Was the study a qualitative or quantitative design? Explain.
Practice Problem
State the practice problem/issue that is the focus of the study.
How does this practice problem/issue affect
your nursing practice?
Study Purpose
State the purpose of the study.
Discuss whether this study was feasible to conduct in terms of money commitment; the researchers' expertise; availability of subjects, and ethical considerations.
Review of Literature
Was the literature review organized to show the progressive development of evidence from previous research?
Was a clear, concise summary presented of the current empirical and theoretical knowledge in the area of the study?
Did the literature review summary identify what was known and not known about the research problem? Did it logically direct the research purpose?
Theoretical Framework
Is a conceptual model or theoretical framework used? If so, is it presented with clarity? Does it adequately explain the phenomenon of concern?
Is the framework linked to the research purpose? If not, would another framework fit more logically with the study?
If a proposition or relationship from a theory is to be tested, is the proposition clearly identified and linked to the study hypothesis?
Research Question(s) and Hpothesis(es)
What is the research question? Is it clearly stated?
Does the research question match the purpose of the study?
What is the research hypothesis? Is it clearly stated?
Does the hypothesis match the purpose of the study?
Formulate a null hypothesis for this study.
Were the objectives, questions, or hypotheses logically linked to the concepts and relationships (propositions) in the framework? Explain.
Variables
List all research variables with corresponding levels of measurement on the NOIR scale.
Do variables represent the concepts identified in the framework?
How is each study variable defined (both conceptually
and operationally)?
Are conceptual definitions of variables consistent with operational definitions?
Study Design
What was the design was used in the study? Was it the most appropriate design to answer the study question? Explain.
Was the design logically linked to the sampling method and statistical analyses?
Did the design provide a means to examine
all objectives, questions, or hypotheses?
If there was an intervention (treatment) in the study:
· what was the intervention? was it clearly described?
· was the treatment appropriate for examining the study purpose and hypotheses?
· did the study framework explain the links between the treatment (independent variab.
research critique_in nursing education.pptx
This document outlines the elements that should be included in a research critique. It defines a research critique as a systematic way to objectively review a research study to identify its strengths and weaknesses. The principles of a good critique are that it should be objective, constructive, balanced, and communicate effectively. Key elements that should be evaluated in a research study include the title, abstract, introduction, design, sample, data collection tools, analysis, results, discussion, conclusions, and recommendations. A strong critique evaluates whether these elements of the study are clearly described and appropriate.
Developing a Systematic Review Topic and Research Question - Dr Buna Bhandari
The document provides guidance on developing research questions for systematic reviews. It discusses identifying gaps in existing literature, generating topic ideas, and developing focused questions using frameworks like PICO. Key points include:
- Systematic reviews aim to summarize all evidence on a research question in a transparent, replicable manner.
- Developing a clear, answerable research question is the foundation for any systematic review.
- Potential topics can come from reviewing literature, expertise, or consulting experts. Gaps in existing knowledge should be identified.
- Questions should be feasible, interesting, novel, ethical, and relevant. Frameworks like PICO can help formulate focused questions.
Research Overview
The document provides an overview of research methodology in 9 steps:
1. Identifying an area of interest or problem to study.
2. Conducting a literature review to understand previous work.
3. Defining clear objectives based on gaps in knowledge.
4. Developing a methodology to achieve the objectives, including study design.
5. Stating a hypothesis or research question.
6. Establishing the importance and rationale of the study.
7. Creating a detailed methodology plan involving statistics experts.
8. Ensuring valid conclusions can be drawn from the methods.
9. Determining feasibility considering time, resources, and necessary approvals.
Fundamentals of Scientific Research: An Overview
Research Basics
Fundamentals of Scientific Research
Research Methodology
Unpacking Nutrition Research and being an effective Science Communicator
Understand what can make nutrition research confusing in the conclusions it reaches and appreciate the key questions to ask when critiquing a research study. Then discover the principles of clear and effective science communication and how to maintain credibility and engage people in different ways on social media,
Critique Template for a Qualitative StudyNURS 5052NURS 6052We.docx
Critique Template for a Qualitative Study
NURS 5052/NURS 6052
Week 6 Assignment: Application: Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies (due by Day 7 of Week 7)
Date:
FORMTEXT
Your name:
FORMTEXT
Article reference (in APA style):
FORMTEXT
URL:
FORMTEXT
What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study.
When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these:
· Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation?
· What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness?
· How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice?
To help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research study of your choice.
If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor.
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE
1. Research Issue and Purpose
What is the research question or issue of the referenced study? What is its purpose? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the question must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.)
2. Researcher Pre-understandings
Does the article include a discussion of the researcher’s pre-understandings? What does the article disclose about the researcher’s professional and personal perspectives on the research problem?
3. Literature Review
What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current, relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.)
4. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework
Is a theoretical or conceptual framework identified? If so, what is it? Is it a nursing framework or one drawn from another discipline? (Sometimes there is no explicitly identified theoretical or conceptual framework; in addition, many “nursing” research studies draw on a “borrowed” framework, e.g., stress, medical pathology, etc.)
5. Participants
Who were the participants? Is the setting or study group adequately described? Is the setting appropriate for the research question? What type of.
Peer review explained: Ayurveda Context
This document discusses the peer review process for Ayurveda research publications. It covers what peer review is, specific points reviewers examine in manuscripts, strengths and weaknesses of peer review, and common problems with Ayurveda manuscripts. Peer review aims to select quality research for publication and funding by having experts evaluate manuscripts. Reviewers check that studies are scientifically sound and address important problems. However, peer review also has weaknesses like bias, and Ayurveda research faces issues like limited specialized journals and unfamiliarity with international standards. The document advocates for training researchers in writing for publication and following reporting guidelines to strengthen Ayurveda research.
For this assignment you willwrite a paper using TOPIC 1 QUANTITAT.docx
For this assignment you willwrite a paper using TOPIC 1: QUANTITATIVERESEARCH &TOPIC 2:QUALITATIVE RESEARCH. Do not worry about the word count as this is not part of the grading criteria for this assignment. Below is a template of how the paper should be setup. This paper will be in APA format. In the template below I am providing a sample of the headers that should be used in APA format to organize your paper. I would highly recommend using them in your paper.
The introduction should introduce the paper. The intro would also include your thesis statement. The thesis tells the reader what will be discussed in the rest of the paper. This section should be in first paragraphs.
PICOT Statement
Revise the PICOT statement you wrote - PICOT Statements: (1). Changes in leisure time physical activity preference and development of hypertension were significantly correlated, especially among urban Chinese. Hypertension prevention programs may identify the groups at elevated risk by examining levels and changes of LTPA preferences. (2). Hypertension is a major health concern that leads to many complications besides the heart attack, heart failure and other related issues. Therefore, this study will help in studying the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) so as to arrive at the solutions. The study will aim at answering the question, how to treat to lower systolic blood pressure. (3). There are several reasons that contributed to non-adherence to treatment in hypertensive patients. Diversity of these reasons is an indication that design and implementation of different kinds of interventions are required in order to increase the patients' awareness, empower them and encourage self-efficacy.” Based on these provide justification of the problem and supporting evidence from multiple resources to justify why this is a problem. This section should be 1-2 paragraphs.
Research Critiques
Use the research critiques to complete this assignment that has both qualitative and quantitative.
Qualitative Studies
Background of the study. Answer the following questions in narrative form regarding the qualitative studies in this section.
· Identify the clinical problem and research problem that led to the study. What was not known about the clinical problem that, if understood, could be used to improve health care delivery or patient outcomes? This gap in knowledge is the research problem.
· How did the author establish the significance of the study? In other words, why should the reader care about this study? Look for statements about human suffering, costs of treatment, or the number of people affected by the clinical problem.
· Identify the purpose of the study. An author may clearly state the purpose of the study or may describe the purpose as the study goals, objectives, or aims.
· List research questions that the study was designed to answer. If the author does not explicitly provide the questions, attempt to infer the questions from the answers.
.
Similar to JOURNAL CRITIQUE (20)
(1) Critique Template for a Qualitative StudyNURS 6052Week.docx
(1) Critique Template for a Qualitative StudyNURS 6052Week.docx
MELJUN CORTES research seminar_1_selecting_a_problem_and_reviewing_the_research
MELJUN CORTES research seminar_1_selecting_a_problem_and_reviewing_the_research
What reasons do the authors give for conducting this research stud.docx
What reasons do the authors give for conducting this research stud.docx
Running head RESEARCH CRITIQUE & PICOT - FINAL 16RE.docx
Running head RESEARCH CRITIQUE & PICOT - FINAL 16RE.docx
Critique Template for a Qualitative StudyCritiquing Qualit.docx
Critique Template for a Qualitative StudyCritiquing Qualit.docx
Developing a Systematic Review Topic and Research Question - Dr Buna Bhandari
Developing a Systematic Review Topic and Research Question - Dr Buna Bhandari
Unpacking Nutrition Research and being an effective Science Communicator
Unpacking Nutrition Research and being an effective Science Communicator
Critique Template for a Qualitative StudyNURS 5052NURS 6052We.docx
Critique Template for a Qualitative StudyNURS 5052NURS 6052We.docx
For this assignment you willwrite a paper using TOPIC 1 QUANTITAT.docx
For this assignment you willwrite a paper using TOPIC 1 QUANTITAT.docx
Recently uploaded
Top Effective Soaps for Fungal Skin Infections in India
Swisschem Dermacare has mentioned the List of The Best Antifungal Soap In India 2022. All of these soaps are trusted by various Dermatology Experts.
Osteoporosis - Definition , Evaluation and Management .pdf
Osteoporosis is an increasing cause of morbidity among the elderly.
In this document , a brief outline of osteoporosis is given , including the risk factors of osteoporosis fractures , the indications for testing bone mineral density and the management of osteoporosis
Phone Us ❤8107221448❤ #ℂall #gIRLS In Dehradun By Dehradun @ℂall @Girls Hotel...
Phone Us ❤8107221448❤ #ℂall #gIRLS In Dehradun By Dehradun @ℂall @Girls Hotel...chandankumarsmartiso
Phone Us ❤8107221448❤ #ℂall #gIRLS In Dehradun By Dehradun @ℂall @Girls Hotel With 100% Satisfaction
Top-Vitamin-Supplement-Brands-in-India List
Swisschem Dermacare provides the Top 10 Vitamin Supplement Brands in India. To know more about us give us call at our official number
Histololgy of Female Reproductive System.pptx
Dive into an in-depth exploration of the histological structure of female reproductive system with this comprehensive lecture. Presented by Dr. Ayesha Irfan, Assistant Professor of Anatomy, this presentation covers the Gross anatomy and functional histology of the female reproductive organs. Ideal for students, educators, and anyone interested in medical science, this lecture provides clear explanations, detailed diagrams, and valuable insights into female reproductive system. Enhance your knowledge and understanding of this essential aspect of human biology.
Basavarajeeyam - Ayurvedic heritage book of Andhra pradesh
Basavarajeeyam is an important text for ayurvedic physician belonging to andhra pradehs. It is a popular compendium in various parts of our country as well as in andhra pradesh. The content of the text was presented in sanskrit and telugu language (Bilingual). One of the most famous book in ayurvedic pharmaceutics and therapeutics. This book contains 25 chapters called as prakaranas. Many rasaoushadis were explained, pioneer of dhatu druti, nadi pareeksha, mutra pareeksha etc. Belongs to the period of 15-16 century. New diseases like upadamsha, phiranga rogas are explained.
Cell Therapy Expansion and Challenges in Autoimmune Disease
There is increasing confidence that cell therapies will soon play a role in the treatment of autoimmune disorders, but the extent of this impact remains to be seen. Early readouts on autologous CAR-Ts in lupus are encouraging, but manufacturing and cost limitations are likely to restrict access to highly refractory patients. Allogeneic CAR-Ts have the potential to broaden access to earlier lines of treatment due to their inherent cost benefits, however they will need to demonstrate comparable or improved efficacy to established modalities.
In addition to infrastructure and capacity constraints, CAR-Ts face a very different risk-benefit dynamic in autoimmune compared to oncology, highlighting the need for tolerable therapies with low adverse event risk. CAR-NK and Treg-based therapies are also being developed in certain autoimmune disorders and may demonstrate favorable safety profiles. Several novel non-cell therapies such as bispecific antibodies, nanobodies, and RNAi drugs, may also offer future alternative competitive solutions with variable value propositions.
Widespread adoption of cell therapies will not only require strong efficacy and safety data, but also adapted pricing and access strategies. At oncology-based price points, CAR-Ts are unlikely to achieve broad market access in autoimmune disorders, with eligible patient populations that are potentially orders of magnitude greater than the number of currently addressable cancer patients. Developers have made strides towards reducing cell therapy COGS while improving manufacturing efficiency, but payors will inevitably restrict access until more sustainable pricing is achieved.
Despite these headwinds, industry leaders and investors remain confident that cell therapies are poised to address significant unmet need in patients suffering from autoimmune disorders. However, the extent of this impact on the treatment landscape remains to be seen, as the industry rapidly approaches an inflection point.
ABDOMINAL TRAUMA in pediatrics part one.
Abdominal trauma in pediatrics refers to injuries or damage to the abdominal organs in children. It can occur due to various causes such as falls, motor vehicle accidents, sports-related injuries, and physical abuse. Children are more vulnerable to abdominal trauma due to their unique anatomical and physiological characteristics. Signs and symptoms include abdominal pain, tenderness, distension, vomiting, and signs of shock. Diagnosis involves physical examination, imaging studies, and laboratory tests. Management depends on the severity and may involve conservative treatment or surgical intervention. Prevention is crucial in reducing the incidence of abdominal trauma in children.
TEST BANK For Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition by...
TEST BANK For Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition by Stamler, Verified Chapters 1 - 33, Complete Newest Version Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition by Stamler, Verified Chapters 1 - 33, Complete Newest Version Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition by Stamler Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition TEST BANK by Stamler Test Bank For Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Pdf Chapters Download Test Bank For Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Pdf Download Stuvia Test Bank For Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Study Guide Test Bank For Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Ebook Download Stuvia Test Bank For Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Questions and Answers Quizlet Test Bank For Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Studocu Test Bank For Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Quizlet Test Bank For Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Stuvia Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Pdf Chapters Download Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Pdf Download Course Hero Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Answers Quizlet Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Ebook Download Course hero Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Questions and Answers Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Studocu Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Quizlet Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Stuvia Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Test Bank Pdf Chapters Download Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Test Bank Pdf Download Stuvia Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Test Bank Study Guide Questions and Answers Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Test Bank Ebook Download Stuvia Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Test Bank Questions Quizlet Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Test Bank Studocu Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Test Bank Quizlet Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition Test Bank Stuvia
Hemodialysis: Chapter 4, Dialysate Circuit - Dr.Gawad
- Video recording of this lecture in English language: https://youtu.be/kqbnxVAZs-0
- Video recording of this lecture in Arabic language: https://youtu.be/SINlygW1Mpc
- Link to download the book free: https://nephrotube.blogspot.com/p/nephrotube-nephrology-books.html
- Link to NephroTube website: www.NephroTube.com
- Link to NephroTube social media accounts: https://nephrotube.blogspot.com/p/join-nephrotube-on-social-media.html
Adhd Medication Shortage Uk - trinexpharmacy.com
The UK is currently facing a Adhd Medication Shortage Uk, which has left many patients and their families grappling with uncertainty and frustration. ADHD, or Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, is a chronic condition that requires consistent medication to manage effectively. This shortage has highlighted the critical role these medications play in the daily lives of those affected by ADHD. Contact : +1 (747) 209 – 3649 E-mail : sales@trinexpharmacy.com
Recently uploaded (20)
Top Effective Soaps for Fungal Skin Infections in India
Top Effective Soaps for Fungal Skin Infections in India
Osteoporosis - Definition , Evaluation and Management .pdf
Osteoporosis - Definition , Evaluation and Management .pdf
Ear and its clinical correlations By Dr. Rabia Inam Gandapore.pptx
Ear and its clinical correlations By Dr. Rabia Inam Gandapore.pptx
Phone Us ❤8107221448❤ #ℂall #gIRLS In Dehradun By Dehradun @ℂall @Girls Hotel...
Phone Us ❤8107221448❤ #ℂall #gIRLS In Dehradun By Dehradun @ℂall @Girls Hotel...
CHEMOTHERAPY_RDP_CHAPTER 6_Anti Malarial Drugs.pdf
CHEMOTHERAPY_RDP_CHAPTER 6_Anti Malarial Drugs.pdf
Basavarajeeyam - Ayurvedic heritage book of Andhra pradesh
Basavarajeeyam - Ayurvedic heritage book of Andhra pradesh
Tests for analysis of different pharmaceutical.pptx
Tests for analysis of different pharmaceutical.pptx
Cell Therapy Expansion and Challenges in Autoimmune Disease
Cell Therapy Expansion and Challenges in Autoimmune Disease
TEST BANK For Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition by...
TEST BANK For Community Health Nursing A Canadian Perspective, 5th Edition by...
Hemodialysis: Chapter 4, Dialysate Circuit - Dr.Gawad
Hemodialysis: Chapter 4, Dialysate Circuit - Dr.Gawad
JOURNAL CRITIQUE
- 1. Critically Appraising a Journal Article NUR ISLAMI MOHD FAHMI TENG
- 2. QUIZ! Choose mode - Kahoot!
- 3. Learning outcome Understanding the process of article critique Student should be able to critique an article
- 4. Benefits of Critical Appraisal An analytical summary and evaluation of a research study Standard approach: recognize important information Standard format: easily digested, a quick read Usable by professionals in busy practices as summarized, synthesized evidence
- 5. Anatomy of a Scientific Article Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results Discussion Conclusion
- 6. Always Ask Six Things As you go through the anatomy of the article, you will always ask six things that will correspond to the various parts of the article.
- 7. Always Ask Six Things 1) What is the clinical question? 2) Why was the question asked? 3) What did they do? Methods 4) What was the answer ? Results 5) What did they say about the answer? Conclusion 6) What do I do with this information? Is this study of significant enough quality in method to change my practice one way or the other? - (Studies done different ways mean different things) (Look at commentary/discussion)
- 8. Always Ask Six Things 1) What is the clinical question? 2) Why was the question asked? 3) What did they do? Methods 4) What was the answer ? Results 5) What did they say about the answer? Conclusion 6) What do I do with this information? Is this study of significant enough quality in method to change my practice one way or the other? - (Studies done different ways mean different things) (Look at commentary/discussion)
- 9. 1. What is the Clinical Question? What type of question is being asked in your article? This is typically found in the Introduction
- 10. Always Ask Six Things 1) What is the clinical question? 2) Why was the question asked? 3) What did they do? Methods 4) What was the answer ? Results 5) What did they say about the answer? Conclusion 6) What do I do with this information? Is this study of significant enough quality in method to change my practice one way or the other? - (Studies done different ways mean different things) (Look at commentary/discussion)
- 11. 2. Why was the question asked? What did the author/s want to know? This is typically found in the Introduction
- 12. Always Ask Six Things 1) What is the clinical question? 2) Why was the question asked? 3) What did they do? Methods 4) What was the answer ? Results 5) What did they say about the answer? Conclusion 6) What do I do with this information? Is this study of significant enough quality in method to change my practice one way or the other? - (Studies done different ways mean different things) (Look at commentary/discussion)
- 13. 3. What did they do? (Methods) YOU LOOK FOR THE VALIDITY OF THE STUDY BY CHECKING THE WAY IT WAS CARRIED OUT.
- 14. 3. What did they do? (Methods) Validity The degree to which the results of a study are likely to be true, believable and free of bias.
- 15. 3. What did they do? (Methods) Bias Deviation of results or inferences from the truth, or processes leading to such deviation. Recall Selection Cultural Conflict of Interest Economic Lead Time Length Time
- 16. Types of Studies There are various types of studies for evaluating the answer to your question
- 17. TYPES OF STUDIES
- 18. Always Ask Six Things 1) What is the clinical question? 2) Why was the question asked? 3) What did they do? Methods 4) What was the answer ? Results 5) What did they say about the answer? Conclusion 6) What do I do with this information? Is this study of significant enough quality in method to change my practice one way or the other? - (Studies done different ways mean different things) (Look at commentary/discussion)
- 19. 4. What was the answer? (Results) What was the consequence, effect, or outcome of the study? This is found in the Results
- 20. Always Ask Six Things 1) What is the clinical question? 2) Why was the question asked? 3) What did they do? Methods 4) What was the answer ? Results 5) What did they say about the answer? Conclusion 6) What do I do with this information? Is this study of significant enough quality in method to change my practice one way or the other? - (Studies done different ways mean different things) (Look at commentary/discussion)
- 21. 5. What did they say about the answer? Conclusion What was the decision reached? This is typically in the Conclusion
- 22. Always Ask Six Things 1) What is the clinical question? 2) Why was the question asked? 3) What did they do? Methods 4) What was the answer ? Results 5) What did they say about the answer? Conclusion 6) What do I do with this information? Is this study of significant enough quality in method to change my practice one way or the other? - (Studies done different ways mean different things) (Look at commentary/discussion)
- 23. 6. What do I do with this information? Is this study of significant enough quality in method to change my practice one way or the other? Look at the commentary and discussion that has been provided by the author/s in the journal article.
- 24. Where to find Commentary PubMed http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?otool=musmlib Google Scholar http://scholar.google.com.medlib-proxy.mercer.edu/ ACP Journal Club http://annals.org.medlib-proxy.mercer.edu/journalclub.aspx Cochrane Journal Club http://www.cochranejournalclub.com.medlib-proxy.mercer.edu/ Evidence Based Medicine http://ebm.bmj.com.medlib-proxy.mercer.edu/
- 26. ORGANISING THE BODY OF YOUR REVIEW A well organised research article has readily identifiable sections including the introduction, methodology, results (findings), and discussion (conclusions and recommendations).
- 27. INTRODUCTION Does the author clearly define a research problem or topic? Is its significance explained? Are core issues or research variables identified? Is specialized terminology usefully defined? Does the author provide an adequate literature review? Does it discuss current research on the problem, and help to situate the author’s own research? Are the research objectives clearly stated? Are hypotheses or specific research questions identified?
- 28. METHODOLOGY Does the author clearly identify the research methodology and any associated limitations of the research design? Are participants described, including the method of sample selection if appropriate? Are instruments adequately described, including issues of appropriateness, validity and reliability? Do any evident biases or ethical considerations arise in relation to the methodology? Are the methods for measuring results clearly explained and appropriate?
- 29. RESULTS Are the author's major findings clearly presented? Do they adequately address the stated research objectives? Are supporting data presented? Are tables, graphs or figures helpful and well integrated with the text?
- 30. DISCUSSIONS Do the research results validate the author’s conclusions and/or recommendations? Are alternative conclusions and/or limitations of the research considered? Is there discussion of any variance between the author’s research and prior research findings? Does the author’s research suggest any direction for further research? Is the practical or theoretical significance of the research emphasized? Does the author recommend the revision of theory or practice in the field?
- 31. CONCLUDING A REVIEW Is the research timely and worthwhile? Is the research design appropriately inclusive and/or sensitive to the cultural context? Are you aware of any significant omissions or errors that might affect the validity or reliability of the research? Are the results original and significant? Does the author provide fresh insight or stimulate needed discussion in the field? Is the article well structured? Are the sections of appropriate length? Do the author’s style and language maintain interest and clarity? Is the presentation unbiased, objective and reasonable? Is the author respectful of participants and the work of other researchers?
Editor's Notes
- An article critique is an assignment that requires a student to critically read a research article and reflect upon it. The key task is to identify the strong and weak sides of the piece and assess how well the author interprets its sources. Simply put, a critique reflects upon the validity and effectiveness of the arguments the article’s author used in his or her work.