Purpose Of A 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 purpose of this report is to conduct a critical appraisal of a published article.

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.

In a world of increasing competition for health resources economic evaluations are essential to provide evidence to decision makers that allows them to make appropriate decisions regarding the best use of those resources (Cohen and Reynolds, 2008; Williams et al., 2008). Critical appraisal is the means by which the validity of this research is assessed and is essential for true evidence based practice, and decision-making (Burls, 2009; Ciliska, Thomas and Buffett, 2008).

Once an area of evidence-based practice has been chosen for investigation, the reviewer must locate current evidence sources and, using a structured approach, assess each for applicability to the issue being investigated. The aim of this paper is to use a Rapid Critical Appraisal Checklist (Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt, 2011) to support these sources of evidence into a review that discusses the importance of daily, high-level, multidisciplinary communication and patient safety. The summaries of these evaluations will be provided as an appraisal of each study.

Evidence-based practice is an approach used by health care professionals to continually use current best evidence-based research to make ethical and reliable decisions regarding patient care. “Research to promote evidence-based practice is becoming more and more a part of the regular work of health care leaders” (Grand Canyon University, 2015, p. 1). However, it is important to determine the difference between solid research and flawed research that provides unreliable inferences. Evidence-based research includes focusing on a clinical question; and includes the review and incorporation of several studies to strengthen the results of the new study (Grand Canyon University, 2015). Roddy et al. and Ganz et al. articles will be assessed to determine if the recommended changes were backed by solid research that warrants changes in a hospital.

The purpose of this paper is to present an analysis of a quantitative article using Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt’s (2015) rapid critical appraisal (RCA) for a randomized clinical trial. Topics included are the validity of the research, results of the research and how the information can be applied to the clinical care of my own patient population.

The purpose of the research review was to attempt to answer the question, does monitoring naturietic peptide twice a month for a month post discharge and altering treatment plan vs. monitoring naturietic as standard practice and altering treatment plan decrease readmission rates in Heart Failure patients after discharge from the hospital? The dependent variable was readmission of Chronic Heart Failure patients (CHF). In order to answer this question, the Cochrane Database was searched using the keywords natriuretic peptide, CHF and readmissions with no limits. The search provided 8 results. According to research naturietric peptide aids in showing the probability for readmission and can therefore

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)

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 purpose of this assignment is to critically appraise a selected research paper following a data extraction relevant to the field of nursing. Critical appraisal is the process of evaluating the strengths and weakness of research, to find out if it is valid, reliable and applicable (Moule and Goodman, 2009). The following article to be critiqued is “A Nutritional Formula Enriched with Arginine, Zinc, and Antioxidants for the Healing of Pressure Ulcers” by Cereda et al. (2015).

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.

Studies 1 and 2 used the standardised critical appraisal tool from the Joanna Briggs Institute. This is a searching and selection process that identifies the specific objectives, study methods, populations and outcome from the chosen studies. Data from study 3 was critically appraised using the Downs and Black tool.

The quantitative article being appraised is by Sniehotta et al (2006) using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) framework tool (CASP 2014). Burls (2009) suggest that CASP is a useful tool to help develop skills to critically appraise and understand scientific research evidence using a simple checklist of questions. Additionally the National Health Service (NHS) resource department recommend CASP as a useful tool for critiquing medical research papers (Havard 2007).

A comprehensive evaluation is usually employed in the nursing process. The process is done when a nurse takes into consideration the healing and the wellbeing of their patients rather than focusing on one fundamental point that helps them in the initiation of a healing process. The practice of holistic assessment in nursing focuses on the patient environment and the various ways through which the body of the patient responds to different factors present in the environment.