Research Critique, Part 1
To write a critical appraisal that demonstrates comprehension of the research study conducted, respond to each of the questions listed under the headings below.
Do not answer the questions with a yes or no; rather, provide a rationale or include examples or content from the study to address the questions.
CRITICAL APPRAISAL GUIDELINES: QUALITATIVE STUDY
Problem Statement
· Identify the clinical problem and research problem that led to the study. What was not known about the clinical problem that, if understood, could be used to improve health care delivery or patient outcomes? This gap in knowledge is the research problem.
- How did the author establish the significance of the study? In other words, why should the reader care about this study? Look for statements about human suffering, costs of treatment, or the number of people affected by the clinical problem.
Purpose and Research Questions
- Identify the purpose of the study. An author may clearly state the purpose of the study or may describe the purpose as the study goals, objectives, or aims.
- List research questions that the study was designed to answer. If the author does not explicitly provide the questions, attempt to infer the questions from the answers.
- Were the purpose and research questions related to the problem?
- Were qualitative methods appropriate to answer the research questions?
Literature Review
- Did the author cite quantitative and qualitative studies relevant to the focus of the study? What other types of literature did the author include?
- Are the references current? For qualitative studies, the author may have included studies older than the 5-year limit typically used for quantitative studies. Findings of older qualitative studies may be relevant to a qualitative study.
- Did the author evaluate or indicate the weaknesses of the available studies?
- Did the literature review include adequate information to build a logical argument?
Conceptual / Theoretical Framework
- Did the author identify a specific perspective from which the study was developed? If so, what was it?
- When a researcher uses the grounded theory method of qualitative inquiry, the researcher may develop a framework or diagram as part of the findings of the study. Was a framework developed from the study findings?
| 1 Unsatisfactory 0%-71% 71.00% | 2 Less Than Satisfactory 72%-75% 75.00% | 3 Satisfactory 76%-83% 79.00% | 4 Good 84%-89% 89.00% | 5 Excellent 90% – 100% 100.00% | ||
| 80.0 %Content | ||||||
| 20.0 %Research problem and purpose | Does not mention research problem or purpose of study. | There are some inaccuracies in describing the research problem. | The research problem and purpose are present and mostly accurate. | The research problem and purpose are described with reference to nursing. | The problem and purpose of the study are clearly articulated, and their importance to nursing addressed. | |
| 20.0 %Research objective, questions or hypotheses | Does not mention objections, research question (s) or hypotheses. | There are some inaccuracies describing the research objective, questions or hypotheses. | The research objective, questions or hypotheses are present and mostly accurate. | The research objective, question or hypotheses are described and related to study methods. | Research question is clearly and accurately described and is congruent with research purpose, method, and worldview of researcher. | |
| 20.0 %Literature Review | Does not mention literature review. | There are some inaccuracies describing the literature review. | The literature review elements are discussed and support the purpose of the study. | The literature review and how it supports the purpose of the study are described. | The literature review critique is thorough and clear, and supports the purpose and research question. | |
| 20.0 %Frame of Reference (qualitative) | Does not mention frame of reference | There are some inaccuracies describing frame of reference. | The frame of reference elements are present and mostly accurate. | The frame of reference is described. | The frame of reference is thorough, clear, and accurately described using research terminology. | |
| 15.0 %Organization and Effectiveness | ||||||
| 5.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. | Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive; contained within the thesis is the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. | |
| 5.0 %Paragraph Development and Transitions | Paragraphs and transitions consistently lack unity and coherence. No apparent connections between paragraphs are established. Transitions are inappropriate to purpose and scope. Organization is disjointed. | Some paragraphs and transitions may lack logical progression of ideas, unity, coherence, and/or cohesiveness. Some degree of organization is evident. | Paragraphs are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other. | A logical progression of ideas between paragraphs is apparent. Paragraphs exhibit a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Topic sentences and concluding remarks are appropriate to purpose. | There is a sophisticated construction of paragraphs and transitions. Ideas progress and relate to each other. Paragraph and transition construction guide the reader. Paragraph structure is seamless. | |
| 5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. | |
| 5.0 %Format | ||||||
| 2.0 %Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. | |
| 3.0 %Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment) | No reference page is included. No citations are used. | Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used. | Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present. | Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and GCU style is usually correct. | In-text citations and a reference page are complete. The documentation of cited sources is free of error. | |
| 100 %Total Weightage |
