NUR 513 Critique of Qualitative and Quantitative Research Studies
NUR 513 Critique of Qualitative and Quantitative Research Studies
Image of hospital nurse using computer (Life in View, n.d.).Qualitative and quantitative research each have value in evidence-based practice and leading industry standards. In this discussion, you will critique research and respond to your peers’ evaluations for both types of research.
This activity will address the following module outcome:
MO 2: Assess evidence and analyze its usefulness for a clinical problem. (EPSLO 2; SLO 5)
In this discussion, you will critique a quantitative and qualitative research study. To give everyone in class an opportunity to critique both types of research, please follow the instructions below. Examples of how to use the quantitative Preview the document [DOCX, file size 25 KB] and qualitative Preview the document [DOCX, file size 28 KB] score card are provided for you.
If your last name begins with A-M:
Read the study by Spiva, et al. (2017). Complete the quantitative research score card Preview the document [XLSX, file size 21 KB] as you review the study. Use Chapters 5 & 6 in Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt (2019) as a resource. Post a brief summary (1-2 paragraphs) of all components listed on the Research Critique Form. Please entitle your initial discussion post: Critique of Spiva, et al. (2017).
Read the study by Hundt, et al. (2018). Reply to a minimum of two other classmates who have posted a Critique of Hundt, et al. (2018) for their initial discussion.
If your last name begins with N-Z:
ALSO READ: NUR 513 Discussion Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Research Part II Excelsior
Read the study by Hundt, et al. (2018). Complete the qualitative research score cardPreview the document [XLSX, file size 21 KB] as you review the study. Use Chapters 5 & 6 in Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt (2019) as a resource. Post a brief summary (1-2 paragraphs) of all components listed on the Research Critique Form. Please entitle your initial discussion post: Critique of Hundt, et al. (2018).
Read the study by Spiva, et al. (2017). Reply to a minimum of two other classmates who have posted a Critique of Spiva, et al. (2017).
Spiva, L., Hart, P. L., Patrick, S., Waggoner, J., Jackson, C., & Threatt, J. L. (2017). Effectiveness of an evidence-based practice nurse mentor training program (Links to an external site.). Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 14(3), 183–191. https://doi-org.vlib.excelsior.edu/10.1111/wvn.12219 Hundt, N. E., Helm, A., Smith, T. L., Lamkin, J., Cully, J. A., & Stanley, M. A. (2018). Failure to engage: A qualitative study of veterans who decline evidence-based psychotherapies for PTSD (Links to an external site.). Psychological Services, 15(4), 536–542. https://doi-org.vlib.excelsior.edu/10.1037/ser0000212
Critical appraisal of source of evidence is an important skill that nurses should possess for them to promote evidence-based practice in their care. Critical appraisal enables the nurses to determine the quality, relevance, and need of evidence presented in a research article. I would focus on the following three sections as I undertake the critical appraisal if I were the nurse in the scenario. The first section I will appraise is the title of the journal. I will check the journal to determine its relevance to my area of interest. I will check the journal to determine if the focus of the research is specific to a given issue of interest in nursing (Al-Jundi & Sakka, 2017). I will also focus on the year in which the journal was published. One of the advantages of appraising using this approach is that it is easy to acquire an understanding of the research focus of the journal. It also saves time that could have been used reading through the other sections of the journal. The approach however does not give information about the design that was used. It might also lead to the elimination of journals that might have new knowledge related to the area of focus in a research.
The second section that I will quickly appraise is the abstract section. I will skim through the abstract to acquire an understanding of the focus of the research. My focus in the analysis of the abstract section will be on the aims of the study, methods used, results, conclusions, and recommendations. The aim of the research should be clearly written. The methods that were utilized for recruiting participants, collecting data, analysing data, and study design should be provided in the materials and methods section of the abstract. The results should link with the variables under the investigations in the research (Al-Jundi & Sakka, 2017). The conclusion should also answer the question of focus in the journal and provide implications of the research to practice. One of the advantages of using this approach is that is provides precise information about the focus of the journal. It also enables the determination of quality journals that can inform the research focus. The approach however does not provide adequate information on the methods and interventions that were used to control variables. The information in the section is also too abstract that it might be difficult to develop conclusive evidence on the relevance of the journal to the research.
The last section that I will appraise is the methods section of the journal. In will reads through the methods and material section to determine the manner in which the research was actually conducted. I will examine the preciseness of the information presented in this section, the sample size, population, and interventions that were used. I will also seek to determine the measures of the study that were of focus in the investigation (Al-Jundi & Sakka, 2017). The data from this section will enable me to determine the credibility and reliability of the reported findings. One of the advantages of using this approach to appraising journals is its focus on the adequacy of the methods used in a research. The approach also enables the determination of the credibility and reliability of the reported findings. The approach is however associated with the disadvantages of this approach is that it takes too much time to get adequate understanding of the methods used and the increased likelihood of lack of relationship between variables and methods used.
References
Al-Jundi, A., & Sakka, S. (2017). Critical Appraisal of Clinical Research. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research : JCDR, 11(5), JE01–JE05. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2017/26047.9942