Research Critique Framework: Qualitative Essay

Exclusively available on Available only on IvyPanda® • No AI

Writing a scholarly research paper follows certain guidelines and format starting with a succinct abstract, introduction, literature review, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion. However, some articles could have altered versions in their organization based on the nature of the study being reported. This paper is a critique of the article “The Experience of Implementing Evidence-Based Practice Change: A Qualitative Analysis” by Irwin et al. (2013).

The title of the article is a good one as it suggests the phenomena being studied (experience of implementing EBP change), even though it does not identify the group or community under study. However, the abstract does not concisely summarize the main features of the report, as it lacks the problem statement, methods, results, and conclusion. The abstract only mentions the purpose of the study. In the introduction, the problem statement is stated unambiguously, it is easy to identify. Given that the study sought to describe the experience of implementing an EBP change by analyzing verbatim narratives, a qualitative approach was appropriate. However, the researchers did not state the research questions, but their absence is justifiable given the nature of the study. Similarly, the authors did not give an elaborate literature review, even though they highlighted some information linked to the existing knowledge related to the topic in the introduction.

Conceptual or theoretical underpinnings were not defined and likewise, but the participants’ identities were not divulged, which safeguards their rights. The nature of the study did not warrant the review of an IRB or ethics review board. In the research design, the participants’ verbatim on their experiences when implementing EBP were collected and analyzed to identify recurring themes, and this design befits this form of a study. The researchers adequately identified the population being studied (nurses) placed in 19 teams, thus the sample was described in sufficient detail. The methods used in data gathering were appropriate with the right questions being asked and a sufficient amount of data gathered. The procedures of data collection and recording were adequately described. The researchers used effective strategies to improve the trustworthiness and integrity of the study to make the results auditable and confirmable.

Data collection and analysis were sufficiently described and the findings were effectively summarized. The themes identified in the study logically connected and the authors interpreted and discussed the findings within the context of prior studies. The reasonable and complete implications of this study in clinical practice were discussed sufficiently. Generally, the report is well-organized and sufficiently detailed for critical analysis. Additionally, the researchers’ qualifications enhance confidence in the findings – Irwin is a research associate, Bergman is an associate scientific director, and Richards is an oncology clinical coordinator. As such, the study’s findings appear trustworthy and they contribute meaningfully to the EBP practice.

In conclusion, the article is generally written well with most aspects of a scholarly paper being considered. The article’s strengths include the use of formal and simple language, thus allowing a wide audience. The authors also referenced credible sources in this paper and they did not give personal opinions – the information provided is objectively based on the findings of the study, which increases the credibility of the study. Additionally, the authors acknowledge the study’s limitations, thus allowing readers to have a balanced understanding of the topic. However, a major weakness of the paper is the lack of a detailed abstract to allow the reader to have a grasp of what is contained in the article.

References

Irwin, M. M., Bergman, R. M., & Richards, R. (2013). The experience of implementing evidence-based practice change: A qualitative analysis. Clinical Journal of Oncology Nursing, 17(5), 544–549. Web.

Appendix

Research Critique Grid

Aspect of the Report	Critiquing Questions	Answer Yes/No	Comment(s)
Title	Is the title a good one, suggesting the phenomena and the group or community understudy?	Yes	The title is clear and captures the phenomena under study.
Abstract	Did the abstract clearly and concisely summarize the main features of the report (problem, methods, results, conclusion)?	No	The abstract does not state the problems, methods, results, or conclusion. It states the purpose of the study
Introduction Statement of the Problem	Was the problem stated unambiguously, and was it easy to identify? Is the problem significant for nursing? Did the problem statement build a persuasive argument for the new study? Was there a good match between the research problem and the methods used – that is, was a qualitative approach appropriate?	Yes	The problem is clearly stated. It is significant in nursing The qualitative approach was appropriate
Research Questions	Were research questions explicitly stated? If not, was their absence justified? Were questions consistent with the study’s philosophical basis, underlying tradition, or ideological orientation?	No	The research questions were not stated clearly
Literature Review	Did the report adequately summarize the existing body of knowledge related to the problem? Did the literature review provide a strong basis for the new study?	No	The research lacks a literature review section
Conceptual/Theoretical Underpinnings	Were key concepts adequately defined conceptually? Was the philosophical basis, underlying tradition, conceptual framework, r ideological orientation made explicit and was it appropriate for the problem?	No	The research lacks definition of key concepts
Method Protection of Human Rights	Were appropriate procedures used to safeguard the rights of study participants? Was the study externally reviewed by an IRB/ethics review board? Was the study designed to minimize risks and maximize benefits to participants?	No	The nature of the study did not require IRB’s review. Participants were informed that their information would be used in the study
Research Design	Was the identified research tradition congruent with the methods used to collect and analyze data? Was an adequate amount of time spent with study participants? Did the design unfold during the data collection, giving researchers opportunities to capitalize on early understandings? Was there an adequate number of contacts with study participants? minimized?	Yes	The study design was befitting this nature of research
Sample and Setting	Was the population adequately identified? Was the sample described in sufficient detail? Was the approach used to recruit participants or gain access to the site productive and appropriate? Was the best possible method of sampling used to enhance information richness and address the needs of the study?	Yes	The population under study was clearly identified.
Data Collection	Were the methods of data gathering appropriate? Were data collected through two or more methods to achieve triangulation? Did the researcher ask the right questions or make the right observations, and were they recorded in the appropriate fashion? Was a sufficient amount of data gathered?	Yes	Data collection methods for the study were appropriate The right questions were asked
Procedures	Were data collection and recording procedures adequately described and do they appear appropriate? Were data collected in a manner that minimized bias? Were the staff who collected data appropriated trained?	Yes	Data collection procedures were appropriate
Enhancement of trustworthiness	Did the researchers use effective strategies to enhance the trustworthiness and integrity of the study? Were the methods for trustworthiness adequate? Did the researcher document research procedures and decision processes sufficiently that findings are auditable and confirmable?	Yes	Effective strategies were used and the methods for trustworthiness were adequate
Results Data Analysis	Were the data management and data analysis methods adequately described? Did the analysis yield an appropriate “product” (a theory, taxonomy, thematic pattern)? Did the analytic procedures suggest the possibility of bias?	Yes	Data management and analysis were adequately described and appropriate for this study
Findings	Were the findings effectively summarized, with good use of excerpts and supporting arguments? Did the themes adequately capture the meaning of the data? Did the analysis yield an insightful, provocative, authentic, and meaningful picture of the phenomenon under investigation?	Yes	Findings were effectively summarized with themes capturing the meaning of the data
Theoretical integration	Were the themes or patterns logically connected to each other to form a convincing and integrated whole? Were figures, maps, or models used effectively to summarize conceptualizations? If a conceptual framework or ideological orientation guided the study, were the themes or patterns linked to it in a cogent manner?	Yes	The thematic patterns were connected to each other to form integrated whole with tables used effectively.
Discussion Interpretation of the findings	Were the findings interpreted within an appropriate social or cultural context? Were major findings interpreted and discussed within the context of prior studies? Were the interpretations consistent with the study’s limitations?	Yes	The major findings were discussed within the context of prior studies and the interpretations were consistent with the study’s limitations
Implications/recommendations	Did the researchers discuss the implications of the study for clinical practice or further research-and were those implications reasonable and complete?	Yes	The researchers discussed the implications of the study and they were reasonable and complete
General Issues Presentation	Was the report well-written, organized, and sufficiently detailed for critical analysis? Was the description of the methods, findings, and interpretations sufficiently rich and vivid?	Yes	The report was well written, organized, and sufficiently detailed for critical analysis with vivid description of methods, findings, and interpretations
Researcher credibility	Do the researchers’ clinical, substantive, or methodologic qualifications and experience enhance confidence in the findings and their interpretation?	Yes	The researchers’ clinical and substantive qualifications enhance the confidence in the findings and their interpretations
Summary Assessment	Do the study findings appear to be trustworthy-do you confidence in the truth value of the results? Does the study contribute any meaningful evidence that can be used in nursing practice or that is useful to the nursing discipline?	Yes	The study findings are trustworthy which increases the confidence in the truth value of the results. The study also contributes meaningfully to evidence-based practice in nursing

More related papers Related Essay Examples