Evaluation Of A Qualitative Research Tool Critical Appraisal

As a student/healthcare worker who is new to critical appraisal I am aware that I do not fully understand some of the calculations involved in reporting of findings, however Greenhalgh (2006) argued, ‘all you really need to know is what the best test is to apply in given circumstances, what it does and what might affect its validity/appropriateness’. When caring for patients it is essential that Healthcare Professionals

The above article will be critiqued using Caldwell, Henshaw and Taylor’s (2005) critiquing framework as a guide (Appendix 1). The intent is to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the research article and demonstrate knowledge and understanding of research methodology.

I will be evaluating two research papers using peter Ellis’s framework (2013). Using critical appraisal framework to evaluate a research paper offers general and specific questions to ask. The framework aids people to recognise if the study was designed and carried out properly and to identify if it is beneficial to other people or has any flaws to it (Steen and Roberts, 2011). The first paper I will be discussing is a quantative paper and the second is a qualitative paper.

CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills programme 2010) is a tool for one to criticize research paper. The questions provided, make one think and consider whether a research study is convincing and trustworthy. In the following, CASP will be used to criticize 1 quantitative research and 1 qualitative research.

This essay will be critiquing the article ‘Fathers ' Involvement in Children 's Services: Exploring Local and National Issues in ‘Moorlandstown’ (Gillina et al, 2012). The article uses qualitative method to establish why fathers are less likely to access children services. It will be using the critical appraisal skills programme (CASP) framework to understand qualitative research to critique this research (CASP, 2013). This framework has been chosen to aid the critical thinking in a systematic manner. It will establish if the results of the article are valid, what the results are and if the results will help locally. This useful aid will enable the reviewer to make sound judgments of the research.

In this paper I will analyze two articles, one is quantitative and the other is qualitative. I will describe the quantitative methods used including the research question addressed, the hypothesis, and variables. I will identify the population and sample. I will discuss the reliability and validity of the instruments used. I will then discuss the design of the article and how the findings were analyzed. For the qualitative article, I will identify the design of the article, the methods used and the strategies used for analyzing the data. Lastly, I will look at the implications for practice in the qualitative article, discuss other journals that might be interested in publishing the article and discuss how this article might

Prepare a critical analysis of a qualitative study focusing on the problem statement, study purpose, research question, literature review, and theoretical framework. This can be one of the selected articles from your previous literature review or a new peer-reviewed article.

Qualitative research reflects different ways that researcher’s collect data and explore all of the information through literature review. Participant’s that are reviewing is often observed for analysis while “the role of the researcher focuses as the primary data collection instrument necessitates the identification of personal values, assumptions and biases at the outset of the study; Qualitative researchers ask at least one central question” (Creswell, 2014, which can be explored in several contexts with further questions. According to the text Research Design (2014) “the researcher’s role is typically involved in a

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)

Gabbay J & le May write “Evidence Based Guidelines Or Collectively Constructed "Mindlines?" Ethnographic Study Of Knowledge Management In Primary Care”, which is a qualitative research to study the collective and individual data methods.(1) In this essay, I will use Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) as a framework to evaluate and analyse the strengths and weakness of the quality of this paper. The paper of Yardley Lucy(2000) as well as kitto et al(2008) will also help to shape the evaluation process.(2, 3)

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.

Described below is a critical appraisal of a qualitative article by Lisa Booth using the frame-work suggested by Ryan, Coughlan and Cronin 2007 to establish its believability, robustness, credibility and integrity (Ryan, Coughlan & Cronin, 2007).

In conclusion, this essay was dealt about a critical appraisal of qualitative study using CASP tool. By doing this module as a nursing student, this helped the author of this essay, to understand the importance of using the critical appraisal in the clinical practice. It also made the student nurse aware, by practicing the critical skills will help to improve the professional standard of competence according to the NMC code (2016). In order to improve the skills in the nursing practice, the student nurse decided to use a structure for her critical frame work, maintaining a reflective diary, and use the up to date evidence in the practice.

Yes. In the article, the aim of the research was to understand the experience of participants, their knowledge about type 2 diabetes, and the factors of medication adherence in Malaysia. According to Susan (2010), the five components of PICOT are population, issue, context, outcome, and time. According to Al-Qazaz et al (2011), the PICOT was presented by the researcher in the study were,

I am in agreement with your process of critical appraisals; identifying the steps in the research process, determining the strengths and weaknesses in the studies and evaluating the validity and credibility of the studies seem to be the root elements of critical appraisals. I appreciated the scholarly article you chose linking depression and mortality among diabetes mellitus patients, particularly because of the straightforwardness of the article. it seemed the conclusion and points of the article were straight forward and the article was easy to understand. If I could suggest any addition, it would be a way to verify the credibility of the study. maybe in this study in particular there is not much incentive for lack of credibility, but in