Article Critique. GUIDE FOR THE RESEARCH ARTICLE CRITIQUE
Select an article (pee
Article Critique. GUIDE FOR THE RESEARCH ARTICLE CRITIQUE
Select an article (peer reviewed) that is supported by evidenced based. For example, how to increase nursing staff retention. If you work in a clinical environment, you may select an area or practice that you want to improve and select an article based on what your have identified.
The guide to the research article critique is listed below. The requirements for the assignment are:
APA 7 Format.
Must be written in a paragraph form. You cannot answer “yes, the title make it clear this is a research paper.” You must state in a narrative form as to the reason why you think it is clear.
Must have 5 references
In-Text citation must be noted throughout
Must have a title page and a reference page.
1. Title: Does the title make it clear this is a research report? Does it give you a clear idea what the study is about?
2. Abstract: Does the abstract clearly summarize all the parts of the study: research questions, method, sample, analysis, results, interpretation, conclusions?
Introduction (background and significance):
3. The first paragraph of any paper should clearly state the central theme of the paper. In a research report, it should clearly state the purpose of the study, or at least it should identify the research problem. At the very least, you should know what the purpose is by the end of the first page, if not the end of the first paragraph. Was this rule followed in this article?
4. Does it explain the human significance of this research? Does the introduction clearly explain why this research is important? Will it reduce human disease, complications or suffering? Will it lead to a reduction in the cost of care? Will it improve the morale or welfare of nurses (who provide patient care)? Will it improve the delivery of care?
Method: Subjects
5. Subjects: Was key information about subjects, such as their age range and mean, the gender and ethnicity mix described?
6. Do the authors explain how subjects were acquired for the study?
7. Is it very clear what sample size was?
8. Adequacy of the Sample Size: Did the authors report a Power Analysis to justify the sample size?
9. If there were both experimental and control groups, was the assignment to groups random? If not, was the rationale for non-random assignment clear? Was it necessary to lose the power of randomization due to the nature of the study, rather than the convenience of the researcher? Remember, non-random means non-equivalent groups! That is a terrible price to pay in terms of threats to validity of the study. Was there a very good reason to pay that price?
10. For Experiments: Were experimental and control groups handled exactly the same except for the experimental treatment?
Method: Research Design
Was the research design explicitly described?
Did they give a name to their design?
Method: Instruments, Procedure
Did the researcher identify the instruments used in the study?
Were these valid and reliable instruments (i.e. had validity and reliability coefficients above .75 and ideally above .80)?
If this is an experimental or predictive study, are both the independent and dependent variables identified clearly and specifically defined?
Was the procedure precisely described so that you could replicate it if necessary?
Do the Authors mention gaining the approval of an Institutional Research Board or Ethics Committee?
Method: Data Analysis
Was there indication that descriptive statistics were used to describe the sample and the variables?
Was there any indication that the tests of normal distributions, skew and kurtosis were done?
Do the authors report the results of their statistical analysis in narrative and/or tables?
Interpretation
From what you can see, did they correctly interpret their results? Did they provide enough detail so that you can see exactly what the results were? Did they show the proper tables, statistics, alpha, etc.?
Conclusions and Implications
Did the researcher explain in a clear and logical manner the meaning of the results?
Did the researcher’s conclusions match the statistical results? For example, if it was non-significant, did the researcher report that the null hypothesis was supported?
Are the recommendations for clinical practice congruent with the statistical results? That is, if the intervention improved patient outcomes, the researcher should suggest it be used clinically. If it made no difference or was harmful, the researcher recommends it not be used clinically.
Were limitations of this research identified somewhere in the article?
Your Conclusions about the Article
Do you think this research is good enough to implement into your own clinical practice (or should a nurse in practice in the specialty of the research implement this research in his/her practice)?
Why or why not?