Definition Of Critical Review

To Critique research articles mean careful and critical appraisal of strength and limitations of a piece of research, rather than hunting for and exposing mistake (Polit and Beck 2008). A research critique is not a summary of the article but find scope and limitation and balance of the validity and significance.

Definition of critical review

You need to put your heading in bold and separate to your paragraph

:A critical review is an evaluation of an academic article or essay. It requested to make judgments, positive or negative, about the text using various criteria. It is an overall critical appraisal, which mainly focuses on the reliability, validity, strengths and weakness, rather than the faults or weakness of the research (New South Wales University, learning Centre date?). The review supposes to be objective, balance discussion and evaluation of the strengths and weakness. (New South Wales University, learning Centre date?). It is the summarization and evaluation of the ideas and information in an article. It expresses the writer’s point of view in the light of what you already know on the subject and what is acquired from related texts.

Purpose of the essay-

The aim of this assignment is to develop a solid understanding of the experiences of residents in nursing home care by critiquing a published qualitative health research. Say who wrote the article, give article title and details. It helps to find out participants belief about their own role and the role of nurses in controlling and managing their condition. Potential benefit from conducting critical review of article is increase share control with health care staff in residential care facilities as well as increase awareness in health care staff, employer and in public.

In this article critical thinking frame work is based on critical review guideline for qualitative studies by Beck, C 2009, ‘Critiquing Qualitative Research,’ Aorn Journal, vol. 90, no.4, pp. 543-545. This article reviewed due to its design and contribution to health care facility;? A bit unclear to read in addition it also increases nursing knowledge and provide awareness in society. Reason behind to use this frame is provides specific guideline and cover all most question of critique such as how to do critique on title, phenomenon, structure, research design analysis data, findings and other prospective of the article.

Title: please give exact study details here -otherwise it is hard to read and mark. I presume from your references you are critiquing:

Nakrem, S, Vinsnes, A. G, Seim, A, 2011. ‘Residents experiences of interpersonal factors in nursing home care: A qualitative study’, International Journal of Nursing Studies vol .48 no.11, pp. 1357-1366.

Title of the study is well-described and self-explanatory. It describes resident’s experience of factors while living in a nursing home. The article title find out age of participants, their experiences of interpersonal relationship factors in nursing home care Title is already indicate it is a qualitative study and title match with context of article. The objective of study is clearly stated in article.

Abstract:

The abstract part: aim was finding out the experiences of the residents with direct nursing care in relation to interpersonal aspects of quality of care. Background – stating as life expectancy rate is lengthening the number of those needing care in nursing home will also increase dramatically over the period of next 20 years (Huber et al., 2009) Quality of care across developed countries mainly focuses on patient safety, excellence in care and patient satisfaction (Nakrem et al., 2009)

Method: phenomenological methodology had been used. Findings were divided into category and then sub categories. Conclusion quality of nursing care depends upon individual approach to medical, physical and psychosocial care, including interpersonal aspects of care. Researcher used a short sentence to cover all aspect of research, also describes well information of data analysis and result. Overall, the abstract clearly and concisely summarized.

Introduction:

Statement of problem; the problem statement is unequivocally and easily located in the first paragraph of the article. The researcher focus on how nursing home quality can be understands from resident point of view. The problem certainly has significance for nursing because the life expectancy and number of resident will increase in the next 20 years.

The problem statement convinced clearly and having an ability to persuade because the study is a greater understanding of interpersonal factors which is very important for improving the quality of patient nurse relationship in nursing homes. This is a bit confusing to read This statement of a problem does build a cogent and persuasive argument for the new study as the consideration of interpersonal relationship factors and quality of nursing care could be difference from nurses and resident’s perspective. It has a great significance in nursing as people who were the owners of the house is now the residents of the nursing home. So they believe their integrity is at risk in nurse patient interaction and care. They feel more dependent and sometime helpless. So it’s very important to study those aspects and find out the drawbacks, so that they can be rectified and the residents feel safer, secure and live their life happily in nursing home. The match between the research problem and the qualitative paradigm and tradition used in the study is good. The researcher used the phenomenological methods in order to explain the life experience of people in nursing home in regards to quality of care and their expectations.

Research questions: In this article author did not clearly state the researcher question, the open ended questions were used and these research questions were further divided in to sub categories for more understanding of problems. Research questions are related with the study. Qualitative method of data collection fits the research question by using phenomenological theory, in residents with lived experience (Polit, Beck & Hungler 2001, p.214).

Literature review: The reporter adequately summarized research that had been conducted on the phenomenon of interpersonal aspects of nursing care. The author clearly stated the gaps in the knowledge, in previous study it was identified that to provide good quality of care and to understand interpersonal aspect of care is essential and residents are primary source to find out the interpersonal factor and outcomes of care, on other hand recent study provide better understanding of interpersonal factor by taking depth interviews of the residence in order to improve the relationship of the residents with their nurses and also in the improvement of the quality of nursing.

Conceptual underpinnings: the researcher provided a conceptual definition of the key concept of interpersonal aspects of quality care. This helps the reader to understand what interpersonal aspects of nursing referred to, and it includes not only medical care but also physical and psychological care, to protect their integrity and to recognize their

individuali psychosocial needs. Be careful of odd capitals in sentences. The researcher did not state philosophical basis of this study in introduction. the author didn’t make any conceptual framework for this study, he just compare and contrast the content on one research theory to compare the content of the study but he did consider the ethical aspect of study, took approval from regional committee for medical and health research either for maintaining privacy and confidentiality of the information collected from the study.

Methods:-

Protecting the participant’s rights:

Approval was obtained from regional committee for medical and health research. However, according to Minichiello et al (2004), the ethical components not just ethics committee and follow-up support but also the informed consent, keeping patients’ information confidently and the right of withdrew the study. Ethical issues related to the research include informed consent, the identity of the researcher, the purpose and nature of the study, the right to refuse and to participate and other such as responsibilities of researcher and possible study benefits, side effects, privacy, autonomy, confidentiality, anonymity etc. these all aspects were taken into consideration by regional committee of medical and health research ethics. For data collection, confidentiality and right to refuse and withdrawal and written consent in addition to oral consent was taken from residents.

Leave a line between sections

Research design and research tradition: Appropriate methods of data gathering and analysis for this study are based on in-depth interviews.This is a qualitative study and the author has used a descriptive and exploratory research design. A phenomenological method is used in which the idea is taken from of the individuals who have actually experienced the situation. (Taylor, & Roberts. 2007, p. 336 incorrect in text reference- always leave author initial out of body of text) The researchers used the phenomenological study to describe the life experiences of people in nursing home in regards to quality of care and their expectations (Vivilaki & Johnson 2008). An adequate time was spent with participants, each interview was lasted for one hour and author find that the long-term residents are individuals with individual background but they also have a shared meaning of experience living in nursing home, so by comparing and contrasting the interpretations of meanings to combine and put together them in general account.

Sample and setting: Participants were selected on based of condition and on the eligible criteria completed by the researchers. This is the plus point for the research (Rawlinson & ?1999, p.859) Initially 24 participants between the ages of 45 to 100 years were chosen from four municipal public nursing homes in Norway. Sample is taken from small, medium and large public nursing homes in rural and urban areas. But only 15 participants chosen with 9 women, 75 – 92 years old and 6 men 80- 96 years old, gave interview, there was a well described site and recruitment of participants which shows that sample size was not adequate.

The inclusion criteria was set on the basis that they were mentally sound residents in the nursing home for minimum of a month and longer and had physical and mental capacity to participate. Individuals those are selected to participate in qualitative research is based on their first-hand experience with a culture social or phenomenon of interest (this is not an author surname. You really need some tutoring from the Student Learning Centre to help you to write correct in text references et.al 2011,p-28) sample decision were made and the sample framed according to the purpose of the study, there is no hard and fast rule rules about numbers, Sample size was not adequate to make a general statement should take at least 50 or 60 sample to make a general statement. For qualitative study it could be 10 -100 but minimum 30 should be when looking for evidence or trying to achieve maximum variation (Tuckett 2004, p.2).

Data collection:

The data was collected by in-depth interviews with the residents. One researcher, to assist the residents an interview guide with open-ended questions, conducted all interviews and probes were used. Three experts reviewed it. A narrative approach was used to encourage the resident to freely speak about their experience. The interviewer repeated and summarised during the interviews to check whether it was correct.

Procedure: The procedure used to collect and record data were adequately described and were appropriate for phenomenological study. Because resident tell their views to the researcher in interviews and bias were minimised. How ? The author did not discussed about staff training for data collection.

Enhancement and rigor: The rigour in qualitative research is demonstrated through researchers, attention to and confirmation of information discovered. The goal of rigor in qualitative research is to accurately represent study participant experienced (p.41) different methods was used to enhance the trustworthiness of the data and analysis, to enhance rigour in data analysis the authors of the article were all involved in discussions about development of analytical concepts. Researcher documented researcher procedures and decision process sufficiently to confirm that the finding is suitable and confirmable, the author himself and two other interviewers’ coded interview separately and compared with the coding done by main author and discussed for abstraction in categories and subgroups in meeting.

Data analysis: Data was analysed by recording and transcribed the data by verbally, the data analytical approach was consisted of coding with categorization, and Interviewer took notes and summarized them. Moreover, interviewer also listened the tape recording carefully and meaningful entities in the transcript were also identified and interviewee’s expressions were sorted into more specific categories and finally each category was synthesized by comparing and contrasting with the already existing theory and literature. An electronic tool was used for mind mapping as well. To enhancing the rigour of the study all authors were involved in discussion about the development of analytical concepts. The main author coded all interview and all study was discussed the abstractions into categories and subgroups by the authors.(Ryan – Nichollas & Will 2009). Good

Findings:

Finding from the qualitative studies may be a show constructive format of phenomena (Polit, Beck & Hungler 2001, p.313). The findings of this research highlight and acknowledge the importance of nurses in general and specialized (holistic) care, prevention of complications and prioritizing the individual needs. Findings also expressed the quality of care according to resident’s point of view to optimize and fulfil their medical, physical and psychosocial needs whilst protecting their integrity, dignity and social status. Findings mainly regard quality of care by building up long-term relationship between nurses and residents to enhance psychosocial wellbeing. Findings were all expressed in the article under separate subheadings for easy review and understanding.

Interpretation of the findings:

Finding is interpreted within an appropriate frame. Author focused on finding related to interpersonal factor of direct nursing care. ?the finding interpreted and discussed within the context of previous studies. The author compares the study with the previous study. In previous study (author, date) it was identified that to provide good quality of care to the residents, to understand interpersonal aspect of care is essential and residents are primary source to find out the interpersonal factors and outcomes of care while recent study provides better understanding of interpersonal factors by taking depth interviews of the residents in order to improve the relationship of the residents with their nurses and also in the improvement of the quality of nursing care. Both studies focus on the interpersonal aspect of care so that nurses can provide better quality of care to residents because residents have long term relationship with nurses in nursing homes. And also author mention about limitation of this study nurse as representative of the health care took interview from the residents might be reluctant to criticize the nursing home quality and author did not put many efforts to understand cultural of the interviewees. Author did not address the issue of transferability of the finding due to small sample consisting of mentally lucid residents from four nursing homes.

Implication and recommendation:

Presentation: The report was well written, flowed logically, and was written in enough detail for critical analysis .the description of finding was rich and powerful.

Researcher credibility: The researcher qualification enhanced confidence in the finding. Researcher was member of Norway College of Nursing facility.

Summary assessment: The study result appears trustworthy. Trustworthiness is at the heart of a qualitative research critique (Beck 2009) This study provide some evidence that can be used in nursing practice in help in improving interpersonal relationship and quality of care in nursing homes. Appear to be trustworthy but author could take more sample/ participants in this study to make finding more general.? does this apply to qualitative work?

Conclusion: This is critiquing and qualitative study about a quality of nursing care in nursing home .This qualitative study is to understand the real needs of the residents and how these needs can be fulfilled by the nurses. Nurses are required to understand the individual needs of the patient through their knowledge and skills in order to provide the holistic care to the residents. Nurses need to maintain the residents’ autonomy and dignity in order to improve the quality of nursing care. Overall, this was a good qualitative article. The researcher used a qualitative research design to explore the experience of residents those who live in the nursing home and providing the evidence for the practice for the healthcare to fulfill the individual needs through interpersonal relationship. The strength of this article would be great purpose, right methodology, and strong rigor. As mentioned previously, strong rigor was the most important part of qualitative study. However, study sample taken was small and the interview was taken by one of the nurse of the nursing may be this affect the views of the resident (Galvin et.al 2005, p-92).

References:

Beck, C 2009, ‘Critiquing Qualitative Research,’ Aorn Journal, vol. 90, no.4, pp. 543-545.

Leave a line between each one, no need to number them

Galvin, Cathy, Roiste first name? and Aine first name?2005, Living in care: older person experience of nursing homes, Irish Journal of applied social studies, vol. 6, issue.1.

Hilarie, Surrena 2011, Qualitative research in nursing,5th edn, China

Minichiello, V Sullivan, G Greenwood, K and Axford, R 2004, Handbook of research methods for nursing and health science, 2nd Pearson Education Australia, Australia.

Nakrem, S, Vinsnes, A. G, Seim, A, 2011. ‘Residents experiences of interpersonal factors in nursing home care: A qualitative study’, International Journal of Nursing Studies vol .48 no.11, pp. 1357-1366.

New South Wales University Learning Centre n.d., Writing a Critical Review, viewed 21 Oct 2011

Polit, D.F & Beck, C.T, 2008, Nursing research : generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice, 8thedn, pp.105-138, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia, USA.

Polit, DF, Beck, CT & Hungler, BP 2001, Essential of nursing research methods, appraisal, and utilization, 5th edn, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia, USA.

Ryan-Nicholls, KD & Will, CI 2009, ‘Rigour in qualitative research: mechanisms for control’, Nurse Researcher, vol. 16, no. 3, viewed 9 September 2012, (online Bell & Howell/ProQuest).

Taylor, B & Roberts, K 2007, Research in nursing and health care: evidence for practice, 3rd edn, Thomson, South Melbourne.

Thomas, Sp & Pollio, HR 2002, Listening to patients: a phenomenological approach to nursing research and practice, Springer, New York.

Tuckett, A, 2009,Qualitative research sampling -The very real complexties nursing research,vol.12, no.1,P.2.

Vivilaki, V & Johnson, M 2008, ‘Research philosophy and Socrates: rediscovering the birth of phenomenology’, Nurse Researcher, vol. 16, no. 1, viewed 9 September 2012, (online Bell & Howell/ProQuest).

Appendix A

Critiquing Qualitative Research put author details here also

Basic Questions for Critiquing Title & Introduction in Qualitative Reports

Title

Was the title a good one, suggesting the key

phenomenon and the group or community under

study?

Introduction

Statement of the problem

Is the problem stated unambiguously and is it easy

to identify?

Does the problem statement build a cogent and

persuasive argument for the new study?

Does the problem have significance for nursing?

Is there a good match between the research

problem on the one hand and the paradigm, tradition,

and methods on the other?

Research questions

Are research questions explicitly stated? If not, is

their absence justified?

Are the questions consistent with the study’s

philosophical basis, underlying tradition, conceptual

framework, or ideological orientation?

Literature review

Does the report adequately summarize the existing

body of knowledge related to the problem or

phenomenon of interest?

Does the literature review provide a solid basis for

the new study?

Conceptual underpinnings

Are key concepts adequately defined conceptually?

Is the philosophical basis, underlying tradition,

conceptual framework, or ideological orientation

made explicit and is it appropriate for the problem?

Basic Questions for Critiquing Results in Qualitative Reports

Results

Data analysis

Were the data management (e.g., coding) and data

analysis methods sufficiently described?

Was the data analysis strategy compatible with the

research tradition and with the nature and type of data

gathered?

Did the analysis yield an appropriate “product”

(e.g., a theory, taxonomy, thematic pattern, etc.)?

Did the analytic procedures suggest the possibility of

biases?

Findings

Were the findings effectively summarized, with good use

of excerpts and supporting arguments?

Do the temes adequately capture the meaning of the

data?

Does it appear that the research satisfactorily

conceptualized the themes or patterns in the data?

Did the analysis yield an insightful, provocative, and

meaningful picture of the phenomenon under

investigation?

Theoretical integration

Are the themes or patterns logically connected to each

other to form a convincing and integrated whole?

Were the figures, maps, or models used effectively to

summarize conceptualizations?

If a conceptual framework or ideological orientation

guided the study, are the themes or patterns linked to it

in a cogent manner?

Basic Questions for Critiquing Discussion in Qualitative Reports

Discussion

Interpretation of the findings

Are the findings interpreted within an

appropriate frame of reference?

Are major findings interpreted and

discussed within the context of prior studies?

Are the interpretations consistent with the

study’s limitations?

Does the report address the issue of the

transferability of the findings?

Implications and recommendations

Do the researchers discuss the implications

of the study for clinical practice or further

inquiry, and are those implications

reasonable and complete?

Basic Questions for Critiquing Methods in Qualitative Reports

Methods

Protection of participants’ rights

Were appropriate procedures used to

safeguard the rights of study

participants?

Was the study subject to external

review?

Was the study designed to minimize

risks and maximize benefits to

participants?

Research design and research tradition

Is the identified research tradition

(if any) congruent with the methods

used to collect and analyze data?

Was an adequate amount of time

spent in the field or with study

participants?

Did the design unfold in the field,

giving researchers opportunities to

capitalize on early understandings?

Was there evidence of reflexivity in the

design?

Was there an adequate number of

contacts with study participants?

Sample and setting

Was the group or population of interest

adequately described?

Were the setting and sample described

in sufficient detail?

Was the approach used to gain access

to the site or to recruit participants

appropriate?

Was the best possible method of

sampling used to enhance information richness and

address the needs of the study?

Was the sample size adequate?

Was saturation achieved?

Data collection

Were the methods of gathering data

appropriate?

Were data gathered through two or

more methods to achieve triangulation?

Did the researcher ask the right

questions or make the right

observations, and were they recorded

in an appropriate fashion?

Was a sufficient amount of data

gathered?

Was the data of sufficient depth and

richness?

Procedures

Were data collection and recording

procedures adequately described and

do they appear appropriate?

Was data collected in a manner that

minimized bias or behavioral distortions?

Were the staff who collected data appropriately trained?

Enhancement of rigor

Were methods used to enhance the trustworthiness of the data

(and analysis), and was the description of those methods adequate?

Were the methods used to enhance credibility appropriate and

sufficient?

Did the researcher document research procedures and decision

processes sufficiently that findings are auditable and confirmable?

Basic Questions for Critiquing Global Issues in Qualitative Reports

Global Issues

Presentation

Was the report well written, well organized, and sufficiently detailed

for critical analysis?

Were the descriptions of the methods, findings, and interpretations

sufficiently rich and vivid?

Researcher(s) credibility

Do the researchers’ clinical, substantive, or methodological

qualifications and experience enhance confidence in the findings

and their interpretation?

Summary assessment

Do the study findings appear to be trustworthy and do you have

confidence in the truth value of the results?

Does the study contribute any meaningful evidence that can be

used in nursing practice or that is useful to the nursing discipline?

Please add rubric

FU logo L mono

Faculty of Health Sciences

School of Nursing & Midwifery

NURS2107/NURS2107A Evidence for Health Care Practice 2

Content marking guide for assignment 3

Introduction (20%)

Grade

HD

D

C

P

F

Purpose of essay clearly stated (2.5%)

x

No stated purpose

A critical review explained/defined (2.5%)

x

No explanation/definition

Potential benefits of conducting critical reviews clearly explained (5%)

x

Potential benefits of conducting critical reviews not stated

Article to be reviewed introduced and context set (2.5%)

x

No introduction of article to be reviewed or context set

Critical thinking framework(s) clearly outlined and rationale for using them explained (5%)

x

No explanation of critical thinking framework(s)

Structure/headings of essay clearly stated (2.5%)

x

Structure/headings of essay not clear

Critical review: quantitative study (40%)

Grade

HD

D

C

P

F

Critique of title, authors and journal (2.5%)

No critique of title, authors and journal

Critique of abstract (2.5%)

No critique of abstract

Critique of introduction/literature review /background (10%)

No critique of literature review

Critique of research design/methodology/methods (10%)

No critique of research design/methodology/methods

Critique of validity and reliability (2.5%)

No critique of validity and reliability

Critique of ethical issues (2.5%)

No critique of ethical issues

Critique of findings (5%)

No critique of findings

Critique of discussion, conclusions, implications, limitations and recommendations (5%)

No critique of discussion, conclusions, implications, limitations and recommendations

Conclusions: quantitative study (10%)

Grade

HD

D

C

P

F

Effective and succinct summary of main findings of critical review (5%)

No summary of main findings of critique process

Established significance of study’s findings relating to evidence-based practice (5%)

Significance of study’s findings relating to evidence-based practice not stated

Critical review: qualitative study (40%)

Grade

HD

D

C

P

F

Critique of title, authors and journal (2.5%)

x

No critique of title, authors and journal

Critique of abstract (2.5%)

x

No critique of abstract

Critique of introduction/literature review /background (10%)

x

No critique of literature review

Critique of research design/methodology/methods (10%)

x

No critique of research design/methodology/methods

Critique of study rigour (2.5%)

x

No critique of validity and reliability or rigour

Critique of ethical issues (2.5%)

x

No critique of ethical issues

Critique of findings (5%)

x

No critique of findings

Critique of discussion, conclusions, implications, limitations and recommendations (5%)

x

No critique of discussion, conclusions, implications, limitations and recommendations

Conclusions: qualitative study (10%)

Effective and succinct summary of main findings of critical review (5%)

x

No summary of main findings of the critique process

Establishing significance of study’s findings relating to evidence-based practice (5%)

x

Significance of study’