Download Guide lines for research critique

Guidelines for a critique of a research report
A. Title of the research report
1. Does the title accurately describe the - type of study?
-Major variables?
-Population to which the study applies?
2. Does it written briefly ( containing no more than 15 words).
2. Does it contain an extraneous words (such a the relationship………, a study
of…….., the effect of……..,)
CRITIQUE………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
B. Problem Statement.
1. Is the problem clearly stated ? ( interrogative form is preferable than
declarative). And should contain population, and the major variables and be
empirically testable.
2. Is there justification for the study?
3. Is the problem significant to nursing?
4. Is the problem researchable ( can data be collected and analyzed).
CRITIQUE………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………
1
C. Conceptual/ theoretical framework.
1. Is there a conceptual model or framework identified?
2. If not specifically identified, is a model or framework implied?
3. Is the conceptual framework applicable to the research?
CRITIQUE………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
D. Review of literature
1. Are classic as well as current citations used?
2. Does the researcher cite supporting, as well as opposing, studies?
3. Is it logically organized? Are there appropriate subheadings?
4. Are most primary sources included?(most of references must be from journals)
5. Are the resources used relevance to the research understudy?
6. Does the literature review flow logically.(classic sources are presented, then
current sources are discussed, and paraphrasing is preferred rather than the
use of large numbers of direct quotation).
7. Does the author at the end of the literature review conclude with a sentence or
two that indicates how the present study will contribute to the existing
body of knowledge in that subject area)
CRITIQUE………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………….
2
………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………….
E. Purpose of the study
1. Is there a purpose statement?( mostly written in declarative form such as…
To determine knowledge, attitudes, and risk-taking behaviors concerning HIV
infections among a low- socioeconomic population of women enrolled in the
Washington welfare health education program) …it contain information what
the researcher intends to do, the setting of the study , and the population
Note : you should remember that purpose statement can be written as a
declarative statement, as a question, or as a hypothesis.
CRITIQUE………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
…………………………………………………………………………………
F. Research questions/ hypothesis clearly identified?
1. Are the research question questions/ hypotheses clearly stated?
Note : (The hypothesis should contain the population and the variables and
reflect the problem statement, should be empirically testable)
CRITIQUE………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………….
3
G. Operational Definitions
1. Are relevant variables operationally defined ?
Note: (indicate the observable, measurable phenomena associated with the
study variables)
CRITIQUE………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………….
H. Research Design.
1. Was the type of research design identified?
2. Does the research design fit appropriately according to the variables studied
and purpose of study.
Note:( In experimental studies which less common than non-experimental studies
in nursing the method of assigning subjects to both group experimental and
control should be discussed and the means to control threats to internal and
external validity should be included)
CRITIQUE………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………
4
I. Sample.
1.Was the target and accessible population clearly described?
2.Was the method of choosing the sample (probability Vs non probability )
appropriate .
3. Based on the sampling procedures, were there any threats to external
Validity (generalization of findings)? If so does the author acknowledge
these threats?
CRITIQUE………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………
J. Data collection procedures
1. Were the steps in collecting data described clearly and concisely?
Note: Five general questions asked in evaluating the data-collection section(what,
How, who, where, and when). If the researcher employed the questionnaire for data
collection , he should peruse the reader that this the appropriate method, and if an
interview method was used the training session conducted to the assistants should be
reported)
CRITIQUE………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
5
………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
……………………………………………………………………………………
K. Data collection instruments
1. Were the instruments/ scale used to collect data appropriate for the
problem and method.
2. Were these instruments / scales reliable ? valid?.
3. Were the means of establishing reliability / validity discussed.
4. Was each instrument described as to how it was scored? Range of
possible scores? What does a high/ low score mean?
Note: 1.Scoring procedure and the range of possible scores on the
instrument should also be included.
2. Validity and reliability to the instrument in addition to the pilot study
should be identified.
CRITIQUE………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………
6
L. Ethical issues.
1. Was evidence of human subject review and approval discussed?
2.Were issues of subject anonymity or confidentiality addressed?
CRITIQUE………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
M. Data analysis
1. Was the choice of statistical procedures appropriate for the
methodology proposed ?
Note: 1. descriptive statistics on the characteristics of the study sample
should be presented first and then finally the inferential
statistics
2.The results of the statistics test, the degree of freedom, and the
probability value should be identified. and these are should be
presented in the text and the tables.
3.The author should state whether the study hypothesis was supported
or not supported
CRITIQUE………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………….
…………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………..
7
N. Results.
1. Are the characteristics of the sample described?
2. Are the research question and the hypothesis answered separately?
3. Do the results limited to data reflect the research questions /
hypothesis?
4. Are generalizations made that are not warranted on the basis of the
sample used?
5. Are tables , charts, and / or graphs used to present data? If so , were
they clearly labeled and discussed in the text?
CRITIQUE………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………….
…………………………………………………………………………………..
O. Discussion
1. Were limitations of the study described?
2. Does the researcher state whether study results support refute
previous studies?
3. Does the researcher relate findings to the problem and purpose of
the studies?
4. Were there any unexpected findings?
8
Note: 1. Should be presented in a completely objective fashion.
2. The author should compare the present study findings with those of
other studies discussed in the literature review. No new literature
sources should be introduced in the discussion section and not
identified in literature review first.
3. Both statistical and clinical significance should be discussed.
4. Study limitation should be discussed well
CRITIQUE………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………................
P. Implication and recommendations
1. Are generalizations made beyond the sample identified in the study?
2. Were suggestions/ recommendations made by the researcher for
nursing practice, administration, education, and / or further
research?
3. Were these suggestions/ recommendations based on the findings of
this study?
9
Note : 1. The implication section contain the should that result from the
research findings.
2. Suggestions may be to replicate study identified. or further development of
the
instrument or use large sample size.
3. Should consider the limitation of the present study and the findings of the
previous study.
CRITIQUE………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………
Other considerations:
1. (Correct grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are essential.
2. Accuracy and completeness of the reference list
With best wishes from
Dr MOHAMMAD M. MOMMANI
10
11