Description
TOPIC: HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE
- Select a health topic of interest to you that is relevant to your current area of practice. The topic may be your Course Portfolio Project or a different topic of your choice.
- Using the Walden Library, locate two articles in scholarly journals that deal with your portfolio topic: 1) Select one article that utilizes a quantitative research design and 2) select a second article that utilizes either a qualitative OR a mixed methods design. These need to be single studies not systematic or integrative reviews (including meta-analysis and metasynthesis). You may use research articles from your reference list. If you cannot find these two types of research on your portfolio topic, you may choose another topic.
- Locate the following documents in this week’s Learning Resources to access the appropriate templates, which will guide your critique of each article:
- Critique Template for a Qualitative Study
- Critique Template for a Quantitative Study
- Critique Template for a Mixed-Methods Study
- Consider the fields in the templates as you review the information in each article. Begin to draft a paper in which you analyze the two research approaches as indicated below. Reflect on the overall value of both quantitative and qualitative research. If someone were to say to you, “Qualitative research is not real science,” how would you respond?
To complete this Assignment:
- Complete the two critiques using the appropriate templates.
- Write a 2- to 3-page paper that addresses the following:
- Contrast the types of information that you gained from examining the two different research approaches in the articles that you selected.
- Describe the general advantages and disadvantages of the two research approaches featured in the articles. Use examples from the articles for support.
- Formulate a response to the claim that qualitative research is not real science. Highlight the general insights that both quantitative and qualitative studies can provide to researchers. Support your response with references to the Learning Resources and other credible sources.
- As you complete this Assignment, remember to:
- Submit your paper to Grammarly and SafeAssign through the Walden Writing Center. Based on the Grammarly and SafeAssign reports, revise your paper as necessary.
- Reminder: The School of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. The School of Nursing Sample Paper provided at the Walden Writing Center provides an example of those required elements (available from the Walden University website found in this week’s Learning Resources). All papers submitted must use this formatting.
- Combine all three parts of this assignment into one Word document including both critique templates and the narrative with your references. Submit this combined document.
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:
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.)
© 2012 Laureate Education Inc.
1
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 the researcher stipulate that
information redundancy was achieved?
6. Protection of Human Research Participants
What steps were taken to protect human research subjects?
7. Research Design
© 2012 Laureate Education Inc.
2
What was the design of the study? If the design was modeled from previous research or
pilot studies, please describe.
8. Data Collection/Generation Methods
What methods were used for data collection/generation? Was triangulation used?
9. Credibility
Were the generated data credible? Explain your reasons.
10. Data Analysis
What methods were used for data analysis? What evidence was provided that the
researcher’s analysis was accurate and replicable?
11. Findings
What were the findings?
12. Discussion of Findings
Was the discussion of findings related to the framework? Were those the expected findings?
Were they consistent with previous studies? Were serendipitous (i.e., accidental) findings
described?
13. Limitations
Did the researcher report limitations of the study? (Limitations are acknowledgments of
internal characteristics of the study that may help explain insignificant and other
unexpected findings, and more importantly, indicate those groups to whom the findings
CANNOT be generalized or applied. It is a fact that all studies must be limited in some way;
not all of the issues involved in a problem situation can be studied all at once.)
© 2012 Laureate Education Inc.
3
14. Implications
Are the conclusions and implications drawn by the author warranted by the study findings?
(Sometimes researchers will seem to ignore findings that don’t confirm their expectations as
they interpret the meaning of their study findings.)
15. Recommendations
Does the author offer legitimate recommendations for further research? Is the description
of the study sufficiently clear and complete to allow replication of the study? (Sometimes
researchers’ recommendations seem to come from “left field” rather than following
obviously from the discussion of findings. If a research problem is truly significant, the
results need to be confirmed with additional research; in addition, if a reader wishes to
design a study using a different sample or correcting flaws in the original study, a complete
description is necessary.)
16. Research Utilization in Your Practice
How might this research inform your practice? Are the research findings appropriate to your
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 the utilization of this research trigger changes in other aspects of practice?
© 2012 Laureate Education Inc.
4
Critique Template for a Quantitative Study
NURS 5052/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.
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE
1. Research Problem and Purpose
What are the problem and purpose of the referenced study? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose
is stated clearly and the problem must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the
purpose.)
© 2012 Laureate Education Inc.
1
2. Hypotheses and Research Questions
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.)
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. Population
What population was sampled? How was the population sampled? Describe the method and
criteria. How many subjects were in the sample?
6. Protection of Human Research Participants
What steps were taken to protect human research subjects?
© 2012 Laureate Education Inc.
2
7. Research Design
What was the design of the study? If the design was modeled from previous research or
pilot studies, please describe.
8. Instruments and Strategies for Measurement
What instruments and/or other measurement strategies were used in data collection? Was
information provided regarding the reliability and validity of the measurement instruments?
If so, describe it.
9.
Data Collection
What procedures were used for data collection?
10. Data Analysis
What methods of data analysis were used? Were they appropriate to the design and
hypotheses?
11. Interpretation of Results
What results were obtained from data analysis? Is sufficient information given to interpret
the results of data analysis?
12. Discussion of Findings
Was the discussion of findings related to the framework? Were those the expected findings?
Were they consistent with previous studies? Were serendipitous (i.e., accidental) findings
described?
© 2012 Laureate Education Inc.
3
13. Limitations
Did the researcher report limitations of the study? (Limitations are acknowledgments of
internal characteristics of the study that may help explain insignificant and other
unexpected findings, and more importantly, indicate those groups to whom the findings
CANNOT be generalized or applied. It is a fact that all studies must be limited in some way;
not all of the issues involved in a problem situation can be studied all at once.)
14. Implications
Are the conclusions and implications drawn by the author warranted by the study findings?
(Sometimes researchers will seem to ignore findings that don’t confirm their hypotheses as
they interpret the meaning of their study findings.)
15. Recommendations
Does the author offer legitimate recommendations for further research? Is the description of
the study sufficiently clear and complete to allow replication of the study? (Sometimes
researchers’ recommendations seem to come from “left field” rather than following
obviously from the discussion of findings. If a research problem is truly significant, the
results need to be confirmed with additional research; in addition, if a reader wishes to
design a study using a different sample or correcting flaws in the original study, a complete
description is necessary.)
16. Research Utilization in Your Practice
How might this research inform your practice? Are the research findings appropriate to your
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 the utilization of this research trigger changes in other aspects of practice?
© 2012 Laureate Education Inc.
4
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:
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.
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.)
© 2016 Laureate Education Inc.
1
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 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.)
4. 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?
5. Protection of Human Research Participants
What steps were taken to protect human research subjects?
© 2016 Laureate Education Inc.
2
6. Research Design
What was the design of the study? If the design was modeled from previous research or
pilot studies, please describe.
7. Instruments, Data Collection, Data Generation Methods
What methods were used for data collection/generation? What instruments and/or other
measurement strategies were used in data collection? Was information provided regarding
the reliability and validity of the measurement instruments? If so, describe it. Was
triangulation used?
8. Credibility
Were the generated data credible? Explain your reasons.
9.
Data Analysis
What methods were used for data analysis? What evidence was provided that the
researcher’s analysis was accurate and replicable?
10. Findings
What were the findings?
11. Discussion of Findings
Was the discussion of findings related to the framework? Were those the expected findings?
Were they consistent with previous studies? Were serendipitous (i.e., accidental) findings
described?
© 2016 Laureate Education Inc.
3
12. Limitations
Did the researcher report limitations of the study? (Limitations are acknowledgments of
internal characteristics of the study that may help explain insignificant and other
unexpected findings, and more importantly, indicate those groups to whom the findings
CANNOT be generalized or applied. It is a fact that all studies must be limited in some way;
not all of the issues involved in a problem situation can be studied all at once.)
13. Implications
Are the conclusions and implications drawn by the author warranted by the study findings?
(Sometimes researchers will seem to ignore findings that don’t confirm their expectations as
they interpret the meaning of their study findings.)
14. Recommendations
Does the author offer legitimate recommendations for further research? Is the description
of the study sufficiently clear and complete to allow replication of the study? (Sometimes
researchers’ recommendations seem to come from “left field” rather than following
obviously from the discussion of findings. If a research problem is truly significant, the
results need to be confirmed with additional research; in addition, if a reader wishes to
design a study using a different sample or correcting flaws in the original study, a complete
description is necessary.)
15. Research Utilization in Your Practice
How might this research inform your practice? Are the research findings appropriate to your
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 the utilization of this research trigger changes in other aspects of practice?
© 2016 Laureate Education Inc.
4
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
NURS 5052/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.)
© 2012 Laureate Education Inc.
1
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 the researcher stipulate that
information redundancy was achieved?
6. Protection of Human Research Participants
What steps were taken to protect human research subjects?
7. Research Design
© 2012 Laureate Education Inc.
2
What was the design of the study? If the design was modeled from previous research or
pilot studies, please describe.
8. Data Collection/Generation Methods
What methods were used for data collection/generation? Was triangulation used?
9. Credibility
Were the generated data credible? Explain your reasons.
10. Data Analysis
What methods were used for data analysis? What evidence was provided that the
researcher’s analysis was accurate and replicable?
11. Findings
What were the findings?
12. Discussion of Findings
Was the discussion of findings related to the framework? Were those the expected findings?
Were they consistent with previous studies? Were serendipitous (i.e., accidental) findings
described?
13. Limitations
Did the researcher report limitations of the study? (Limitations are acknowledgments of
internal characteristics of the study that may help explain insignificant and other
unexpected findings, and more importantly, indicate those groups to whom the findings
CANNOT be generalized or applied. It is a fact that all studies must be limited in some way;
not all of the issues involved in a problem situation can be studied all at once.)
© 2012 Laureate Education Inc.
3
14. Implications
Are the conclusions and implications drawn by the author warranted by the study findings?
(Sometimes researchers will seem to ignore findings that don’t confirm their expectations as
they interpret the meaning of their study findings.)
15. Recommendations
Does the author offer legitimate recommendations for further research? Is the description
of the study sufficiently clear and complete to allow replication of the study? (Sometimes
researchers’ recommendations seem to come from “left field” rather than following
obviously from the discussion of findings. If a research problem is truly significant, the
results need to be confirmed with additional research; in addition, if a reader wishes to
design a study using a different sample or correcting flaws in the original study, a complete
description is necessary.)
16. Research Utilization in Your Practice
How might this research inform your practice? Are the research findings appropriate to your
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 the utilization of this research trigger changes in other aspects of practice?
© 2012 Laureate Education Inc.
4
Critique Template for a Quantitative Study
NURS 5052/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.
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE
1. Research Problem and Purpose
What are the problem and purpose of the referenced study? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose
is stated clearly and the problem must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the
purpose.)
© 2012 Laureate Education Inc.
1
2. Hypotheses and Research Questions
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.)
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. Population
What population was sampled? How was the population sampled? Describe the method and
criteria. How many subjects were in the sample?
6. Protection of Human Research Participants
What steps were taken to protect human research subjects?
© 2012 Laureate Education Inc.
2
7. Research Design
What was the design of the study? If the design was modeled from previous research or
pilot studies, please describe.
8. Instruments and Strategies for Measurement
What instruments and/or other measurement strategies were used in data collection? Was
information provided regarding the reliability and validity of the measurement instruments?
If so, describe it.
9.
Data Collection
What procedures were used for data collection?
10. Data Analysis
What methods of data analysis were used? Were they appropriate to the design and
hypotheses?
11. Interpretation of Results
What results were obtained from data analysis? Is sufficient information given to interpret
the results of data analysis?
12. Discussion of Findings
Was the discussion of findings related to the framework? Were those the expected findings?
Were they consistent with previous studies? Were serendipitous (i.e., accidental) findings
described?
© 2012 Laureate Education Inc.
3
13. Limitations
Did the researcher report limitations of the study? (Limitations are acknowledgments of
internal characteristics of the study that may help explain insignificant and other
unexpected findings, and more importantly, indicate those groups to whom the findings
CANNOT be generalized or applied. It is a fact that all studies must be limited in some way;
not all of the issues involved in a problem situation can be studied all at once.)
14. Implications
Are the conclusions and implications drawn by the author warranted by the study findings?
(Sometimes researchers will seem to ignore findings that don’t confirm their hypotheses as
they interpret the meaning of their study findings.)
15. Recommendations
Does the author offer legitimate recommendations for further research? Is the description of
the study sufficiently clear and complete to allow replication of the study? (Sometimes
researchers’ recommendations seem to come from “left field” rather than following
obviously from the discussion of findings. If a research problem is truly significant, the
results need to be confirmed with additional research; in addition, if a reader wishes to
design a study using a different sample or correcting flaws in the original study, a complete
description is necessary.)
16. Research Utilization in Your Practice
How might this research inform your practice? Are the research findings appropriate to your
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 the utilization of this research trigger changes in other aspects of practice?
© 2012 Laureate Education Inc.
4
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:
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.
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.)
© 2016 Laureate Education Inc.
1
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 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.)
4. 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?
5. Protection of Human Research Participants
What steps were taken to protect human research subjects?
© 2016 Laureate Education Inc.
2
6. Research Design
What was the design of the study? If the design was modeled from previous research or
pilot studies, please describe.
7. Instruments, Data Collection, Data Generation Methods
What methods were used for data collection/generation? What instruments and/or other
measurement strategies were used in data collection? Was information provided regarding
the reliability and validity of the measurement instruments? If so, describe it. Was
triangulation used?
8. Credibility
Were the generated data credible? Explain your reasons.
9.
Data Analysis
What methods were used for data analysis? What evidence was provided that the
researcher’s analysis was accurate and replicable?
10. Findings
What were the findings?
11. Discussion of Findings
Was the discussion of findings related to the framework? Were those the expected findings?
Were they consistent with previous studies? Were serendipitous (i.e., accidental) findings
described?
© 2016 Laureate Education Inc.
3
12. Limitations
Did the researcher report limitations of the study? (Limitations are acknowledgments of
internal characteristics of the study that may help explain insignificant and other
unexpected findings, and more importantly, indicate those groups to whom the findings
CANNOT be generalized or applied. It is a fact that all studies must be limited in some way;
not all of the issues involved in a problem situation can be studied all at once.)
13. Implications
Are the conclusions and implications drawn by the author warranted by the study findings?
(Sometimes researchers will seem to ignore findings that don’t confirm their expectations as
they interpret the meaning of their study findings.)
14. Recommendations
Does the author offer legitimate recommendations for further research? Is the description
of the study sufficiently clear and complete to allow replication of the study? (Sometimes
researchers’ recommendations seem to come from “left field” rather than following
obviously from the discussion of findings. If a research problem is truly significant, the
results need to be confirmed with additional research; in addition, if a reader wishes to
design a study using a different sample or correcting flaws in the original study, a complete
description is necessary.)
15. Research Utilization in Your Practice
How might this research inform your practice? Are the research findings appropriate to your
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 the utilization of this research trigger changes in other aspects of practice?
© 2016 Laureate Education Inc.
4
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
