Critiquing A Qualitative Research Article

· The results of the study, the interpretation of the data by the authors and any conclusions they include at the end of the article.

The qualitative article being appraised is by Martin and Woods (2012) using the CASP tool qualitative framework (CASP 2013). These tools have been validated to ensure that studies can be assessed in a consistent way assessing the trustworthiness of the research article (Aveyard, 2014)

Different types of research studies form the basis of evidence-based practice among many different aspects of health care. Qualitative research studies look at the most complex issues nurses face today and there is an emphasis on the need for more studies of this type. Critiquing qualitative research studies validate the study and provides a smooth transition incorporating the findings into clinical practice. Therefore, developing and maintaining the skills for critiquing research is a core nursing skill. However, many nurse professionals do not feel fully confident in critically appraising qualitative research studies. Nurses who are not comfortable with their skills in determining the quality of research studies, can spend ample amounts of time and challenges due to the language of research. The purpose of this paper is to systematically appraise a published research article, using the critiquing framework by Polit and Beck (2012). The paper chosen to be critiqued is a descriptive qualitative article that is titled “How Christian Nurses Converse With Patients About Spirituality” by Pfeiffer, Gober and Taylor (2014) published in the Journal of Clinical Nursing.

This is an academic critique of a qualitative article published in 2012, by Maj-Britt Raholm, RN, MNsc, PhD. In the article, “The ethics of presence when bathing patients in a nursing home”, the researcher intends to create a more profound understanding of the ethics of presence from the nurses perspective (Raholm, 2012, p. 30). The study will be analyzed for the credibility, conformability, and dependability to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the article. Based on the analysis a recommendation for evidence-based practice will be advised or rejected.

Make sure the article is about an actual research study, and NOT simply a literature review, systematic literature review, case study, a study with less than 30 participants, or a report.

For example, a grounded theory study by Spinewine, Swine, Dhillon, Franklin, Tulkens, Wilmotte & Lorant (2005), was conducted to uncover appropriateness of use of medicines in elderly inpatients. The researchers found that nursing staff, pharmacists and geriatricians agreed that prescribing of medications and counselling of patients was insufficient and the data that was shared with the medical officer upon discharge was not adequate. Grounded theory focuses on a group, not individuals and is larger than ethnographic and phenomenological methods.

In your own words, write a summary of the study that reviews the purpose, variables, hypotheses, method, results and major conclusions. The best way to ensure that you are using your own words, and not just copying the article, is to read it from start to finish (a few times, if necessary), then put the article out of sight, and describe it as best you can from memory. This takes time to do well, so this is not the type of assignment that can be done the night before it is due! (15 points; approx. 1-1.5 pages)

In 2010 another study was designed to build and expand researcher from the 1996, National Elder abuse incidence study. This study was designed to understand the mistreatment among elders living in the U.S. This study was designed to assess the different types of abuse over one year prevalence.

Everyone possess critical thinking skills but when it comes to criticize a journal article it can be difficult for the first time, one of the best ways to develop critical thinking and reading skills is to use some strategies when reading and evaluating a research study (Wood & Haber,1998). The following essay it is going to focus in a critique of a qualitative journal article by giving its strengths and weakness, critical appraisal it is going to be done with support from different references and frameworks relevant to a qualitative study.

Anderson, (2015) states that an abstract should give the research questions, outline the methods used- and why and summaries the research. In this article the

The purpose of this qualitative study was to describe how occupational therapists’ involved client-centred activities in daily living (CADL) in their practice. This was done by reviewing the therapist’s experiences and reflections about their interaction with clients that suffered from a stroke. The study involved coding of three categories. These categories included: 1) Sharing an understanding as the point of departure, 2) Sharing through experiences, and 3) Challenges in applying the CADL.

According to Fain (2017) the title is written to capture the reader and inform them of the purpose of the study. The title of the article clearly represents the research report. The variable of interest is understood from the title. However, the population studied and the setting of the study is not stated in the title. An abstract is constructed in order to provide a summary of the research study and should include the purpose and findings in the study (Fain, 2017). There is an abstract provided in the

A good abstract will be short, about 250 words,because in most cases people do not have time to read long abstracts when looking for sources to use in their research, thus having a short abstract would save them the struggle. Also, it should mention the methodology/approach adopted, this is very important because readers want to know if the methods you use have any validity/reliability e.g if a person argues that blacks are inferior to whites, then went on to tell us that his data comes from collecting information from reading the white nationalist newspaper called the Breitbart and also following thousands of hours from watching FOX news or following Trump’s twitter then it would be a worst of time to read such a paper as the methodology/methods

The purpose of the article is to review and critique the article “Changes in Maternal Characteristics in Nova Scotia, Canada from 1988 to 2001” (Fell, et al., 2005). The study design of Fell et al., (2005) research analysis is a prospective perinatal population base cohort study from 1988 to 2001. The goal of the research was to trend specific characteristics like age, smoking and weight gain in pregnant women in the Nova Scotia area. In this paper, the writer will critique several different aspects of the article including discussion of the theoretical, methodological and interpretive dimension of the article. This criterion will be based on the article “A nurses’ guide to the critical reading of research.” Lastly, the critique will conclude with a brief summary of the writer’s thoughts on the research.

The stated focus, intent, purpose, and research questions are clearly defined by the author. The reader is able to clearly understand these aspects of the research. Additionally, the author clearly identifies the problem and research questions, and the rationale for the research being conducted. Likewise, the methodology section clearly presents the manner in which the research was conducted and why the specific method was chosen. As a result, a fellow researcher