Assignment: Critique Two Primary Research Evidence Sources

Assignment: Critique Two Primary Research Evidence Sources

Assignment Critique Two Primary Research Evidence Sources

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: Assignment Critique Two Primary Research Evidence Sources

In this task, you will critique two primary research evidence sources. You will select one quantitative and one qualitative peer-reviewed journal article on a healthcare topic of interest.


 No more than a combined total of 30% of the submission and no more than a 10% match to any one individual source can be directly quoted or closely paraphrased from sources, even if cited correctly.

Evaluate a primary quantitative research peer-reviewed journal article (suggested length of 3-5 pages) that has healthcare implications by doing the following:

A1. Identify how the researcher addresses the five following areas of the selected journal article, using the attached Evidence Table:

.background or introduction

.review of the literature

.discussion of methodology

. data analysis

. researchers conclusion

A2. Critique whether the evidence presented in each section of the journal article supports the researchers conclusion.
Note: The attached Evidence Table may be used to address A1. A2-A5 may be addressed on the same page under the table.

A3.Explain the protection of human subjects and cultural considerations of the journal article.

A4. Identify strengths and limitations of the studyAssignment Critique Two Primary Research Evidence Sources

A5. Describe how the evidence informs nursing practice.
B. Evaluate a primary qualitative research peer-reviewed journal article (Repeat above steps for second article) (suggested length of 3-5 pages)

Depending on the originality of the information offered and their proximity to the source of information, sources are classified as main, secondary, or tertiary. 
This distinction varies depending on the subject and field.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: Assignment Critique Two Primary Research Evidence Sources

In the sciences, research findings may be shared among researchers informally via email, presented at conferences (primary source), and then published as journal article or technical report (primary source). 
The information may be commented on by other academics (secondary sources) and/or properly indexed in database once it has been published (secondary sources). 
Later, the data could be compiled into an encyclopedia or reference book (tertiary sources).


Sources of Information
In science, primary source is document or record that contains information about study, experiment, trial, or research endeavor. 
The hypothesis, technique, and results are frequently included in primary sources written by the person(s) who did the research, conducted the study, or conducted the experiment.


Among the primary sources are:


Pilot/prospective research


Cohort studies are type of research that looks at


Case studies from survey research


Notebooks for labs


Clinical trials and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are two types of clinical trials.




Sources of Secondary Information


Secondary sources compile, analyze, compare, and assess primary data and studies in order to arrive at conclusions about the current state of knowledge in discipline or subject. 
bibliography may be included in the sources, which might lead you back to the primary study mentioned in the article.


Secondary sources include the following:


professional news sources, reviews, systematic reviews, meta-analysis newsletters, and reviews


norms and guidelines for practice


monographs entries in nursing or medical encyclopedias clinical care notes patient education information government legal information




More information on Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis can be found here.


Systematic evaluations – 
When it comes to answering single queries, systematic reviews are the best option (eg, the effectiveness of tight glucose control on microvascular complications of diabetes). 
They’re more scientifically structured than standard reviews, with details on how the authors tried to discover all relevant publications, rate the scientific quality of each study, and weigh data from several studies with contradictory results. 
To eliminate publication bias, these reviews take special attention to including all strong research, whether or not it has been published (positive studies are preferentially published).




Meta-analysis is term that refers to the process of 
Meta-analysis is statistical tool for statistically combining the results of multiple research, which is often used in systematic reviews. 
It can be used to calculate an overall estimate of an intervention’s net benefit or harm, even if these effects were not seen in individual trials [9]. 
Other factors such as diagnostic accuracy, incidence, or prevalence can also be quantified using meta-analysis.