Each student is assigned to a group with an assigned topic/research problem. Complete the following as it relates to the topic. Choose five (5) research articles i

Quantitative Template

Aspect of the Report

Critiquing Questions

Yes No Unsure NA

Title

Is the title a good one, succinctly suggesting key variables and the study population?

Comments

Abstract

Did the abstract clearly and concisely summarize the main features of the report (problem, methods, results, conclusions)?

Comments

Introduction

Statement of the problem

Was the problem stated unambiguously, and was it easy to identify?

Is the problem significant for nursing?

Did the problem statement build a persuasive argument for the new study?

Was there a good match between the research problem and the methods used—that is, was a quantitative approach appropriate?

Comments

Hypotheses or research questions

Were research questions and/or hypotheses explicitly stated? If not, was their absence justified?

Were questions and hypotheses appropriately worded, with clear specification of key variables and the study population?

Were the questions/hypotheses consistent with existing knowledge?

Comments

Literature review

Was the literature review up-to-date and based mainly on primary sources?

Did the review provide a state-of-the-art synthesis of evidence on the problem?

Did the literature review provide a strong basis for the new study?

Comments

Conceptual/

theoretical framework

Were key concepts adequately defined conceptually?

Was a conceptual/theoretical framework articulated—and, if so, was it appropriate?

If not, is the absence of a framework justified?

Were the questions/hypotheses consistent with the framework?

Comments

Method

Protection of human rights

Were appropriate procedures used to safeguard the rights of study participants?

Was the study externally reviewed by an IRB/ethics review board?

Was the study designed to minimize risks and maximize benefits to participants? ?

Comments

Research design

Was the most rigorous design used, given the study purpose?

Were appropriate comparisons made to enhance interpretability of the findings?

Was the number of data collection points appropriate?

Did the design minimize biases and threats to the internal, construct, and external validity of the study (e.g., was blinding used, was attrition minimized)?

Comments

Population and sample

Was the population identified?

Was the sample described in sufficient detail?

Was the best possible sampling design used to enhance the sample’s representativeness?

Were sampling biases minimized?

Was the sample size adequate?

Was the sample size based on a power analysis?

Comments

Data collection and measurement

Were the operational and conceptual definitions congruent?

Were key variables measured using an appropriate method (e. g., interviews, observations, and so on)?

Were specific instruments adequately described and were they good choices, given the study population and the variables being studied?

Did the report provide evidence that the data collection methods yielded data that were reliable, valid, and responsive?

Comments

Procedures

If there was an intervention, was it adequately described, and was it rigorously developed and implemented?

Did most participants allocated to the intervention group actually receive it?

Was there evidence of intervention fidelity?

Were data collected in a manner that minimized bias?

Were the staff who collected data appropriately trained?

Comments

Results

Data analysis

Were analyses undertaken to address each research question or test each hypothesis?

Were appropriate statistical methods used, given the level of measurement of the variables, number of groups being compared, and assumptions of the tests?

Was a powerful analytic method used? (e.g., did the analysis help to control for confounding variables)?

Were Type I and Type II errors avoided or minimized?

In intervention studies, was an intention-to-treat analysis performed?

Were problems of missing values evaluated and adequately addressed?

Comments

Findings

Was information about statistical significance presented?

Was information about effect size and precision of estimates (confidence intervals) presented?

Were findings reported in a manner that facilitates a meta-analysis, and with sufficient information needed for EBP?

Comments

Discussion Interpretation of the findings

Were all major findings interpreted and discussed within the context of prior research and/or the study’s conceptual framework?

Were causal inferences, if any, justified?

Was the issue of clinical significance discussed?

Were interpretations well-founded and consistent with the study’s limitations?

Did the report address the issue of the generalizability of the findings?

Comments

Implications/

recommendations

Did the researchers discuss the implications of the study for clinical practice or further research—and were those implications reasonable and complete?

Comments

General Issues

Presentation

Was the report well-written, organized, and sufficiently detailed for critical analysis?

In intervention studies, was a CONSORT flowchart provided to show the flow of participants in the study?

Was the report written in a manner that makes the findings accessible to practicing nurses?

Comments

Researcher credibility

Do the researchers’ clinical, substantive, or methodologic qualifications and experience enhance confidence in the findings and their interpretation?

Comments

Summary assessment

Despite any limitations, do the study findings appear to be valid—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?

Comments

Qualitative Template

Aspect of the Report

Critiquing Questions

Yes No Unsure NA

Title

Is the title a good one, suggesting the key phenomenon and the group or community under study?

Comments

Abstract

Did the abstract clearly and concisely summarize the main features of the report?

Comments

Research questions

Were research questions explicitly stated? If not, was their absence justified?

Were the questions consistent with the study’s philosophical basis, underlying tradition, or ideologic orientation?

Comments

Conceptual underpinnings

Were key concepts adequately defined conceptually?

Was the philosophical basis, underlying tradition, conceptual framework or ideologic orientation made explicit and was it appropriate for the problem?

Comments

Research design and research tradition

Was the identified research tradition (if any) congruent with the methods used to collect and analyze data?

Was an adequate amount of time spent with study participants?

Did the design unfold during data collection, giving researchers opportunities to capitalize on early understandings?

Was there an adequate number of contacts with study participants?

Comments

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? Were the data of sufficient depth and richness?

Comments

Enhancement of trustworthiness

Did the researchers use effective strategies to enhance the trustworthiness/integrity of the study, and was there a good description of those strategies?

Were the methods used to enhance trustworthiness adequate?

Did the researcher document research procedures and decision processes sufficiently that findings are auditable and confirmable?

Was there evidence of researcher reflexivity?

Was there “thick description” of the context, participants, and findings, and was it at a sufficient level to support transferability?

Comments

Findings

Were the findings effectively summarized, with good use of excerpts and supporting arguments?

Did the themes adequately capture the meaning of the data? Does it appear that the researcher satisfactorily conceptualized the themes or patterns in the data?

Did the analysis yield an insightful, provocative, authentic, and meaningful picture of the phenomenon under investigation?

Comments