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.

1. Muthuvenkatachalam Srinivasan,
Ph.D Scholar, Mental Health Nursing.

2. It is a critical evaluation/appraisal of a research
report

3.  “A critical estimate of a piece of research
which has been carefully and systematically
studied by a critic who has used specific
criteria to appraise the favorable, less
favorable and other general features of the
research study”
Leininger

4.  Requires critical thinking, appraisal &
intellectual skill
 Involves a careful examination of all aspects
of a study to judge the merits, limitations,
meaning and significance & knowledge of the
topic

5.  To assess students` methodological and
analytical skills (identify limitations &
strengths)
 Seasoned researcher to help journal editions
 Written critique is a guide to researcher
 To advance nursing knowledge & profession

6.  Two principles to remember when critiquing
a research are
(a) be objective
(b) make your comments specific to the
work you are reviewing
 Critique should be an advisory and
constructive nature

7.  Read & Critique the entire study
 Be objective & Realistic
 Comment on strengths and weakness
 Give specific examples
 Use the positive terms whenever possible and
say the positive points first

8.  Avoid vague generalizations of praise and
fault findings
 Be sensitive in handling negative comments
 Evaluate substantive, ethical, methodologic,
interpretative presentational dimensions
 Suggest alternatives

9.  What type of study was conducted ?
 What was the setting ?
 Were the steps clearly identified ?
 Was there a logical flow ?

10.  Substantive & theoretical dimensions
 Methodologic dimensions
 Ethical dimensions
 Interpretative dimensions
 Presentation/stylistic dimensions

11.  Readers of a research report need to
determine whether a study was worthy in
terms of the significance of the problem, the
soundness of the conceptualization &
appropriateness of the conceptual
framework.
 Normally communicated in the report’s
introduction

12.  The heart of a research critique lies in the
analysis of the methodologic decisions
adopted.
 In a quantitative study, the four major
decision points to focus critical attention are
Decision 1, Design :What design will yield
the most unambiguous and meaningful
results about the relationship between the
independent and dependent variables?

13.  What extraneous variables are to be controlled
and how best can this be accomplished?
DECISION 2, SAMPLE : who should participate
in the study?
DECISION 3, DATA COLLECTION :What
method should be used to collect the data?
DECISION 4, DATA ANALYSIS :What
statistical analysis will provide the most
appropriate tests of the research hypotheses?

14.  Need to consider whether the right of human
subjects were violated during the
investigation.
 If there is potential Ethical concerns, we need
to consider its impact both on the scientific
merit and on well being of the participants.

15.  Research reports conclude with a Discussion,
Conclusions or Implications section.
 Here researcher attempt to make sense of
the analysis, to consider whether the findings
support or fail to support hypotheses or
theory.

16.  Writing a research report should be clear,
grammatical, concise and well organized.
 Unnecessary jargon should be minimized.
 Quantitative research reports are written in a
more formal, impersonal fashion, using either
the third person or passive voice to connote
objectivity

17.  Qualitative studies are written in a more
literary style, using first or second person &
active voice to connote proximity & intimacy
with the data & phenomenon under study.

18.  Clear / concise
 Too big / too small
 Gives precise information
 Research questions empirically tested?
 Definitions of terms clearly described?

19.  Is the purpose of the study presented ?
 Is the significance (importance) of the
problem discussed ?
 Does the investigator provide a sense of what
he or she is doing and why ?

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

21.  Does the report tie the problem to various
related research?
 Is there overdependence on secondary
source?
 Recent literature included?
 Overdependence on anecdotes/ opinion
articles over empirical studies?
 Paraphrased adequately? Analyzed critically?

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

23.  Is a rationale stated for the theoretical/
conceptual framework ?
 Does the investigator clearly state the
theoretical basis for hypothesis formulation ?
 Does it link the problem to a theoretical /
conceptual framework in a natural way?

24.  Is the hypothesis stated precisely, logically
and in a form that permits it to be tested ?
 Does it express a predictable relationship?
 Do they flow logically?
 Do they include general population of
interest?

25.  Are the relevant variables and concepts
clearly and operationally defined ?
 Is the design appropriate for the research
questions or hypotheses ?

26.  Is experimental/ non experimental
approaches best?
 Appropriate procedures and methods of data
collection described sufficiently and clearly?
 Procedure for preventing contamination
between treatment and control group
described?
 If there was more than one data collector,
was the inter-rater reliability adequate ?

27.  Are the subjects and sampling methods
described ?Sample size justified?
 Is the sample of sufficient size for the study,
given the number of variables and design ?
 Is there adequate assurance that the rights of
human subjects were protected ?Response
rate reported?
 Are the subjects representative of the
sample? Are key characteristics described?

28.  Instruments clearly identified and described?
 Method of development of tools appropriate with
regard to structure?
 Are the instruments developed specifically for the
study? Are the processes for its development
described?

29.  Are appropriate instruments for data
collection used ?
 Are reliability and validity of the instruments
adequate ?
 If instrument new/ adapted, if sufficient
testing done?
 Evidence for validity and reliability
presented?

30.  Is analysis consistent with objectives of study?
 Type of analysis appropriate for type of data?
 Is information unnecessarily converted?

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

32.  Are the results for each hypothesis clearly
and objectively presented ?
 Are the figures and tables used efficiently to
highlight and streamline the presentation of
results?
 Are results described in light of the
theoretical framework and supporting
literature ?

33.  All important results discussed?
 Interpretation organized in meaningful
fashion?
 Does interpretation distinguish practical and
statistical significance?

34.  Is it appropriate?
 Are implications of findings discussed (i.e.,
for practice, education and research) ?
 Does it include nursing implication?
 Are recommendations for further research
stated ?

35.  Is the study of sufficient quality to meet the
criterion of sufficient merit ?
 Does the study meet the criterion of
replicability ?
 Is the study of relevance to practice ?
 Is the study feasible for nurses to implement ?
 Does the benefits of the study outweigh the
risks ?

36.  Are conclusions based on the results and
related to the hypothesis ?
 Are study limitations identified ?
 Are generalizations made within the scope of
the findings ?

37.  Title- of reasonable length
 Summary- abstract included
 Bibliography- style & citation
 pleasant to read
 Grammatically correct
 No complex sentences

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

39.  Burns N, Grove SK.The Practice of Nursing
Research conduct, critique & utilization. 5 edi.
W.B. Saunders Company: Philadelphia; 2005.
 Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing Research Principles
and Methods. 7 edi. LippincottWilliams &
Wilkins company: Philadelphia; 2004.
 Rose Marie Nieswiadomy. Foundations of
Nursing Research. 5 edi. Dorling Kindersley
Pvt. Ltd. Pearson Education: India; 2009.