Critiquing Qualitative Research Interview

Two types of data were collected through surveys, both before and after implementation of the combined approach (Sand-Jecklin and Sherman,2014). The first data was on nurses’ point of view with regards reporting process, and the second on patients view regrading nursing care. The baseline survey included 233 patients and 148 nurses, while the survey three months into the implementation period included 157 patients and 98 nurses. The final survey, 13 months into the impanation, was completed by 154 patients and 54 nurses. The patient survey also included responses from patient families. These were 70, 72, and 53 responses for baseline survey, three-month postimplementation surveys, and 13-month postimplementation surveys.

with recommendations for changes needed in nursing. This was a response for the need to assess

Research is relevant to nursing with a specific end goal to interpret obstructions, increment estimation of patient care, propose new thoughts for future research, and shape the benchmarks at which we rehearse at. Studying research permits experts the capacity to decide qualities and shortcomings in every specific piece. Evaluating is imperative to bolster or expose conclusions found by the examination directed. Supporting or exposing research takes into consideration medical attendants to reinforce proper patient mediations and execute them with the most extreme endorsement. It is imperative for me to understand how to properly critique research for my career as a nurse so that I can stand by the medical

In the study by Finnbogadottir and Dykes (2012) the report was well written, it was grammatically correct, concise and well organised. The authors qualifications and positions were clearly identified and indicated that Finnbogadottir was attached to the department of nursing at Malmo University, Sweden and was a PHD student. Dykes was a professor and attached to the division of nursing at Lund University, Sweden. The report title was clear and accurate and un ambiguous. It clearly highlighted what the study was about. The abstract was a clear overview of the study and reflected the content of the paper. It provided details of the research problem, the sample, the methodology and findings with recommendations.

This research article is from the UK and the writer questions if the findings from this study will have heuristic relevance and applicability to nursing and healthcare in the United States (U.S.). Primary healthcare in the UK is provided through the National Health Service (NHS); this writer has little knowledge as to how it works and its impact on patient care and nursing. This limited knowledge may introduce bias in this critique.

Nurses are required to base their practice on evidence-based research. Therefore, it is essential for nurses to develop the skills necessary to analyze a research article. Critiquing a research article helps nurse judge the creditability of the information presented. This essay reviews a qualitative study titled “Factors Associated With Aggressive Behavior Among Nursing Home Residents With Dementia.”

One of the external threats that were present during the survey is the patients’ condition, which could have influenced the work of the nurses. Since there are different conditions of patients, one of these could have influenced patient cases, teamwork and hence the study was not considerate enough. In addition, the study failed to integrate the participation of the nurses and instead focused on other staffs (Kalisch & Lee, 2011, p. 86). This could have triggered any negative relationships between the selected staffs and the nurses.

Introduces and defines the topic, as well as describes its importance to professional nursing. Depth and detail are fair. (19–20 points)

Another reason the design is in harmony with the purpose of the study is identified by the author; there is a lack of narratives of nursing care. The nursing profession has an acute absence of stories that in their collective strength describe not only what nurses do but why. The "why" component is a critical aspect of the nursing profession. It determines how actors understand their roles, and the behaviors that are consistent with those

Hospitals nationwide can account for their nurse’s patient care through the survey (). If a nurse is consistently having issues with patient care, it can be shown through this survey and improved on. This leads to better teaching practices in nursing schools and hospitals. When nurses can see what works and does not work, improvements can be made in training new nurses, and this is based on patient needs. Patients are the best source of information on how to improve nursing practices, which is why the HCAHPS has become successfully and widely

Polit, D., & Beck, C.T. (2012). Quantitative research design. (Laureate Education, Inc., custom ed.), Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (pp. 201-231). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

I will methodically analyze all parts of the study to assess the validity of the article, by contrasting and comparing the information provided, with previous literature. I will try to make sure that recommendations provided by the authors are congruous with nursing practice and beneficial to the advancement of it. I will as much as possible provide in depth detail of previous studies on the same topic that either support or contradict the analysis provided by this study and its authors.

The author of this paper has been an associate’s degree registered nurse since 2005. Upon graduation from the ADN program at the College of Central Florida, the author

This paper will address and evaluate the research problem itself, the design of the study, the sample, how the data is collected, its limitations, and its findings. Furthermore, how does this study impact the overall nursing process?

There are three authors for this quantitative research study. Martin Knoll is the HTW of Saarland, Clinical Nursing Research and Evaluation, Saarbruecken, Germany. Christine Lautenschlaeger, Institute of Medical Epidemiology, Biometry and Medical Informatics, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Germany is the second author. And last, Marianne