NURSING 314: RESEARCH METHODS

Anne Hedger, MN, ACNP-CS, ANP-CS, CCRN
Adjunct Faculty

Linfield-Good Samaritan School of Nursing

Spring 2006

Course Number:

NUR 314

Course Title:

Research Methods  

Faculty:

Anne Hedger, MN, ACNP-CS, ANP-CS, CCRN
Adjunct Faculty
ahedger@linfield.edu

annehedger@yahoo.com  (alternate)

 

Office Hours:  Contact me for appointment

 

Catalog Description:

Methods used in formulating and conducting research on problems arising within health care.
Prerequisite: Statistics course

 

Course Objectives:

 

1. Identify the major steps in the research process.
2. Define the relationship between problem identification and a theory in the research process.
3. Describe strengths and limitations of various research designs.
4. Differentiate between probability and nonprobability sampling.
5. Describe various data collection methods.
6. Define types of reliability and validity of quantitative data collection instruments.
7. Describe criteria for evaluating the trustworthiness of qualitative data.
8. Describe the analysis of quantitative and qualitative research data.
9. Interpret and evaluate research.
10. Discuss ethical issues relevant to research.

 

Topical Outline:

I. Major Steps in the Research Process
II. Theory and Problem Identification
III. Research Designs
IV. Sampling
V. Data Collection Methods
VI. Quality of Data
VII. Analysis of Data
VIII. Interpreting and Evaluating Research
IX. Ethical Issues in Clinical Research

 

Teaching Strategies:

Lecture/discussion online
Audiovisual aids
Reading assignments
Homework assignments
Study Modules

Small group work

Evaluation Methods:

Research Utilization Assignments

Preparation of a research proposal
Critique of a research study

Study modules
Attendance, preparation and participation

Required Texts:

Polit, D. & Beck, C. (2005). Essentials of Nursing Research (6th ed.).   Philadelphia: Lippincott.

Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. (5th  ed.). (2001). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.

Date

Content

For this week

Week One
2/11/06- 2/22/06


Course Overview
Overview of the research process.
Research problems, questions,& hypotheses
Evaluating research reports

P&B Ch. 1-3, 5,15

Week Two

2/23/06-3/1/06 

Literature reviews, theories and conceptual
frameworks, ethics in research
Quantitative research designs

P&B Ch. 4, 6-8

Week Three 

3/2/06-3/8/06

Qualitative research designs,
triangulating methods, & sampling Overview of data collection methods

P&B Ch. 9-11

Week Four

3/9/06-3/15/06

Data collection methods, measurement, data quality
Writing research proposals

P&B Ch. 12

Week Five

3/16/06-3/22/06 


Overview of quantitative data analysis and descriptive statistics
Inferential and multivariate statistics

P&B Ch. 13

Week Six

3/23/06-3/29/06 


Overview of qualitative analysis
Computers in nursing research,
Utilization of nursing research

P&B Ch. 14-16

Week Seven
until end of term

No in-class work. Now is the time to concentrate on your research, critique and your research proposals.

 

 4/21/06

Paper Due by 5 pm today! Critique of research study.

 

 5/12/06

Paper Due by 5 pm today! Research Proposal. 

 

 

 

 

CLASS SCHEDULE

Classes will open on Thursdays at 12:00 am (midnight) and close the following Wednesday at 11:59 pm. Please Note! All theory for this course will be presented in a six week intensive format. Beginning Week 7, there will be no new content because the rest of the semester is allocated for work on the two major papers comprising the bulk of the course grade.

 

  EVALUATION

In order to successfully pass NUR 314 you must receive a Grade of at least "C" in the critique of a research report, and grade of at least "C" in the research proposal. Class attendance, preparation and participation is expected.

 

Each assignment will comprise the following points toward your final grade:

Research Utilization Exercise                                   Points

            Identification of Problem Area                           5 

            Written Problem Statement                               5 

            List of 10 research articles from lit review          5 

            Approval of critique article                                5 

Research Report Critique                                          120 
Research Proposal:                                                   120

Weekly Quizzes (6 weeks, 20 points each)               120
Participation                                                               20

 

Total                                                                     400 pts

Bonus Questions (6 weeks, 3 pts each)                    18 

 

Grade  Points              Percentage

A         372-400           (93-100)

A-        360-371           (90-92)

B+       344-359           (86-89)

B          332-343           (83-85)

B-        320-331           (80-82)

C+       304-319           (76-79)

C         292-303           (73-75)

C-        280-291           (70-72) Unacceptable Grade

D+       264-279           (66-69)

D         252-263           (63-65)

D-        240-251           (60-62)

F          0-239               (0-59)

 

Penalty for Assignments Submitted Late:

Five points will be subtracted for each day an assignment is late. Upon request, the instructor may grant a one-day extension on a due date.

Incomplete Course Work

A grade of incomplete will not be given for NUR except for extremely extenuating circumstances. Before such a grade is awarded, a contract specifying remaining requirements and due dates must be agreed upon by the student and instructor.

Academic Dishonesty

Academic work is evaluated on the assumption that the work presented is the student's own, unless designated otherwise. Anything less is unacceptable and is considered academic dishonesty.

Cheating consists of using or attempting to use unauthorized materials, information, or study aids in any academic work submitted for credit. 

Plagiarism is the submission of academic work for credit that includes materials copied or paraphrased from published or unpublished works without documentation.

Fabrication is the falsification or invention of any information or citation in academic work.

Facilitating academic dishonesty consists of helping or attempting to help another student to violate the college's policy on academic dishonesty.

The course instructor will, when discovering a case of academic dishonesty, inform the Dean of Students, as well as the student, in writing of the incident within ten days of the discovery of the offense. The written document detailing the incident will also be placed in the student's permanent file in the Records Office. Engaging in academic dishonesty will result in not passing the course. The Dean of Students is responsible for referring all cases involving more than one offense to the College Judicial Council, which may impose College-level penalties. Students may appeal a decision.

 

 

Students with documented disabilities who may need accommodation, who have any emergency medical information that the instructor should know, or who require special arrangements in the event of evacuation, should meet with the instructor as early as possible, no later than the first week of class.

 

Disability

 

 

Permission for Copies of Student Work:  Faculty may wish to copy one or more of your papers or other course work to use as examples for other students in the future or for accreditation reviews.  Your name will be removed before showing your paper to any other student.  If you do not want your paper(s) or work in this course to be copied for accreditation or as a sample for future students, please notify the instructor in writing by the last week of classes.  If you do not notify faculty by this time, permission to copy will be assumed.  However, you may at any time during the course or in the future notify faculty in writing that you deny permission to use your work and any copies will be destroyed.  Please keep copies of any request and faculty response for your own records.

 

COURSE REQUIREMENTS

A. Study Modules/Quizzes

Each week you have required study modules to complete and submit. These activities give you the opportunity to demonstrate, other than through an exam, your understanding of the research process. These activities have been designed to facilitate your understanding of research and to stimulate your critical and creative thinking processes.

 

Each module has a series of multiple choice questions, similar to a quiz.  These can be open book, open notes, and you can work together with your classmates, if you desire.  These multiple choice questions are required and each question is worth one (1) point.  **Important:  I will post the quiz at the beginning of each week.  You can print out the quiz and work on it as you do your reading assignments.  Do not access the quiz again until you are ready to input the answers.  You are permitted to submit the answers to the quiz just once.  Do not submit your answers until you are ready and can complete these.  When you fill in the answers, you should do it in one sitting so that you don’t get logged off and lose your submission.  

 

You will also note that there are bonus questions.  You may use your books and notes, but your answers must be your own.  You can discuss the questions with your classmates, but your submission must show your unique work and thought process.   The bonus questions are used to give extra credit.  Each bonus question is worth up to three (3) points, and you will be graded on the bonus activity that you complete, your thoroughness in your response, the correctness of the response and your presentation of the information.  The points you gain from these bonus questions will be added to your final grade point tally, which can greatly assist in your grade in the end.  Should you decide to do the bonus question for the week, submit it to the assignments section.

 

Bonus questions cannot be used in lieu of other assignments.  All other assignments are required, and must be completed to use the option of the extra credit bonus option.

 

Your quiz grade will be available after the due date.  You can take the quiz anytime during the week that you want, but each quiz is due the last day of that week (Wednesdays), as are the bonus points.  Check “my grades” for your results.  The bonus questions will not be reflected immediately in “my grade,”  but you can expect a timely response.

 

 

B.  Research Utilization Assignments

Steps

1.         Identify a problem that you have encountered in your nursing practice.
The problem could be a procedural practice, a communication problem, a decision
making problem, etc. Submit a one paragraph essay on why you have decided this is a problem.  Indicate why you wish to do research in this area.  Look at the problem generally, and also specifically.   Submit your paragraph to the assignments section by the due date.

2.         Submit a list of the following on your topic/focus of the area you deemed problematic.  Phrase the answers to the following as discussed in your text and study materials.  Submit to the assignments section by the due date.

 

1.  What is your Problem Statement?  

2.  Formulate your Problem Statement into a Research Question.

3.  Pose three Hypotheses on this Problem Statement and Research Question. 

4.  What is your Statement of Purpose?

5.  What are your three Aims/Objectives in your proposed study?

3.         Do a literature search to identify articles that relate to your problem statement.
Select a minimum of 10 articles that are less than 5 years old, and submit a list of the 10 articles using APA format as a reference list to the assignments section by the due date.

4.         Select one (1) researched based article that relates to your problem statement to critique.  Obtain instructor approval on this article.  Submit the name of the article, journal and author in an APA reference list format to the assignments section. This article should be less than 5 years old, and from a scholarly journal.  Once you have my approval, you may proceed in working on your Research critique assignment.  Once approved, you will need to forward a copy of the article to me.  You can send by email attachment, or by U.S. Postal Service to me.    (PO Box 399, Beavercreek, OR  97004)

5.         Critique Research article. See criteria in the syllabus below on Research Critique.

6.         Complete the Research Proposal.  See criteria in the syllabus below.

Grading

Identification of Problem Area                                       Due 2/15/06     5 pts

Written Problem Statement                                           Due 2/17/06     5 pts

List of 10 Research Articles from Lit Review                 Due 3/10/06     5 pts

Approval of Critique Article                                          Due 3/17/06     5 pts

Research Critique                                                         Due 4/21/06     120 pts

Research Proposal                                                        Due 5/12/06     120 pts

 

C.  CRITIQUE OF A RESEARCH REPORT

 

GUIDELINES FOR INDIVIDUAL CRITIQUE OF NURSING RESEARCH STUDY

You are required to read and critique the faculty approved nursing research article discussed through the research utilization exercise and report your findings in a narrative format.  Be sure to comment on the study’s strengths as well as weaknesses.  Give specific examples of both.  Avoid vague generalizations of praise and fault-finding.  Suggest alternatives that the research (or future researchers) might want to consider.  Don’t just identify the problems in the research study.  Offer some recommended solutions, making sure the recommendations are practical ones.

Address each of the following areas.  Do not answer questions with yes/ no answers. Explain, describe and give examples from the article to support your critique.  You are to submit the following via the assignments section by the due date. 

A.  A copy of the research article.  You can scan, email as an attachment, or send via US Postal Service as discussed above.

B.  The paper should be double-spaced and grammatically correct.  Attach a reference list in APA format, 5th edition.  Reference the research article and any literature used to support the critique.   The critique itself should address each of the following questions with answers and rationale.  Please answer the questions as given below, and write in paragraph format.  Please use the headings as listed below to organize your critique.  The paper itself does NOT have to be in APA format, although the reference list does.

 

1.  Initial Critique

 

  • What type of study was conducted?
  • What was the setting?
  • Were the steps for the research process clearly identified?
  • Were any of these steps missing?
  • Did the study flow logically from one section to another?
  • Is the study an important one in terms of the significance of the problem studied
  • Does this research problem have obvious relevance to some aspect of the nursing profession
  • Was it feasible for the researchers to study the problem and purpose identified?

 

2.  Purpose, Objectives, Hypotheses, Questions

 

  • State the research problem and purpose.
  • Where does the author state the purpose?
  • Is the problem to be addressed formally stated as a statement of purpose, research question, or hypothesis to be tested? Is this information communicated clearly and concisely?
  • Are the purpose statements and research questions worded appropriately (e.g., are key concepts or variables identified and the study group or population of interest specified)?
  • In the introduction to the problem, what is the general area of concern in need of a solution, improvement and/or alteration?
  • Do you agree with the author as to the need for the study?
  • Are the objectives, questions or hypotheses linked to the study framework?
  • Are the hypotheses testable in the study?
  • State the research hypothesis(es). If the author did not state research hypotheses, is their absence justifiable?
  • Explain how the hypotheses flow logically from the theoretical rationale or review of the literature? If the hypotheses do not relate to the review of the literature, what justification is offered for the researcher's predictions?
  • Are the hypotheses directional or nondirectional? State the rationale for the type of hypotheses (directional or nondirectional).
  • Are hypotheses stated as research hypotheses or null hypotheses?
  • Does the problem have significance for the nursing profession? How will the research contribute to nursing practice, nursing administration, or nursing education?

3.  Literature Review

  • Are the relevant studies identified and described?
  • Are the majority of sources primary or secondary?
  • Does the literature review include current sources?
  • Is the present study connected to previous research?
  • Does the content of the literature review relate directly to the research problem or is it only peripherally related? Give examples to support your response.
  • Did the author critically appraise and compare key studies? Are the studies critiqued by the researcher, or just brined accounts of the study results given?
  • Is the review organized in such a way that the development of ideas is clear?
  • If the review is part of a research report for a new study, does the review support the need for the new research? If the review is designed to guide clinical practice, does the review of the evidence support the need for (or lack of need for) changes in practice?
  • Is the style of the review appropriate? Does the reviewer paraphrase, or is there an overreliance on quotes? Does the review appear unbiased? Does the reviewer use appropriately tentative language?

 

4.  Theoretical/Conceptual Framework

 

  • Does the research report describe an explicit theoretical or conceptual framework for the study? If not, does the absence of an explicit framework detract from the usefulness or significance of the research?
  • What is the framework, and how is it presented?
  • Does the framework describe and defined the concepts of interest?
  • Does the framework present the relationships among the concepts and related them to the study variables?  
  • Does the report adequately describe the major features of the framework so that readers can understand the conceptual basis of the study?
  • Is the framework consistent with the research paradigm?
  • Do the research problem and hypotheses naturally flow from the framework, or does the purported link between the problem and the framework seem contrived?
  • Are conceptual definitions of the concepts in the study provided? Are the conceptual definitions consistent with the framework? Are the definitions clear and sufficiently detailed?
  • Identify the variable(s) of interest in the study.
  • State the conceptual definition of each variable.
  • State the operational definition of each variable.
  • Are the variables adequately defined?
  • Which variable(s) are independent variables
  • Which variable(s) are dependent variables.
  • Did the framework guide the study methods? For example, do the operational definitions correspond to the conceptual definitions? Were hypotheses tested statistically?
  • Does the researcher tie the findings of the study back to the framework at the end of the report? How do the findings support or undermine the framework? Are the findings interpreted within the context of the framework?

 

5.  Design

 

Research Designs in Quantitative Studies

 

  • Given the nature of the research question, what type of design is most appropriate? How does this correspond to the type of design used?
  • Does the design used in the study involve an intervention? If yes, was an experimental, quasi-experimental, or preexperimental design used--and was this the most appropriate design?
  • If the design is nonexperimental, why didn't the researcher manipulate the independent variable? Was the decision regarding manipulation appropriate?
  • Was the study longitudinal or cross-sectional? Was the number of points of data collection appropriate, given the research question?
  • What type of comparisons were called for in the research design (e.g., was the study design within-subjects or between-subjects)? Are these comparisons the most appropriate for illuminating the relationship between the independent and dependent variables?
  • Can the study be described as a survey, an evaluation, or outcomes research?
  • What procedures, if any, did the researcher use to control external (situational) factors and intrinsic (subject characteristic) factors? Were these procedures appropriate and adequate?
  • To what extent is the study internally valid? What types of alternative explanations must be considered (i.e., what are the threats to the study's internal validity)? Does the research design enable the researcher to draw causal inferences about the relationship among study variables?
  • To what extent is the study externally valid?
  • What are the major limitations of the design used? Are these limitations acknowledged by the researcher and taken into account in interpreting the results?

 

Qualitative and Integrated Designs

 

  • Is the research tradition within which the qualitative study was undertaken identified? What was the tradition? If no research tradition is identified, can one be inferred?
  • Does the research question appear to be congruent with the research tradition (i.e., is the domain of inquiry for the study congruent with the domain encompassed by the tradition)? Do the data sources and general methods of the study appear consistent with the tradition?
  • How well is the research design described? Are design decisions explained and justified?
  • Does the design appear thoughtful and appropriate? Does the design lend itself to a thorough, in-depth, intensive examination of the phenomenon of interest? What design elements might have strengthened the study (e.g., would a longitudinal perspective have been preferable, although a cross-sectional design was used)?
  • Is the study exclusively qualitative, or were both qualitative and quantitative data collected? Could the study have been strengthened by the inclusion of some quantitative data?
  • If both qualitative and quantitative data were collected, were they used in complementary fashion? How (if at all) did the inclusion of both types of data contribute to enhanced theoretical insights, enhanced validity, or movement toward new frontiers?

 

6.  Ethical/Protection of Human Subjects

 

  • Are there any ethical transgressions in this study, or is there any evidence that the rights of human subjects were violated during the course of the investigation.
  • Were the subjects informed about the research project?
  • Were the study participants subjected to any physical harm, discomfort, or psychological distress? Did the researchers take appropriate steps to remove or prevent the harm?
  • Did the benefits to participants outweigh any potential risks or actual discomfort they experienced? Did the benefits to society outweigh the costs to participants?
  • Was any type of coercion or undue influence used in recruiting participants? Were vulnerable subjects used?
  • Were participants deceived in any way? Were they fully aware of participating in a study, and did they understand the purpose of the research? Were appropriate consent procedures implemented?
  • Were appropriate steps taken to safeguard the privacy of participants?
  • Was the research approved and monitored by an Institutional Review Board or other similar ethics review committee?

 

7.  Sampling

 

Quantitative Sampling Designs

  • Is the target or accessible population identified and described? Are eligibility criteria specified? To whom can the study results be generalized?
  • Are the sample selection procedures clearly described? What type of sampling plan was used?
  • How adequate is the sampling plan in terms of yielding a representative sample?
  • Did some factor other than the sampling plan affect the representativeness of the sample (e.g., a low response rate)?
  • Are possible sample biases identified?
  • Is the sample size sufficiently large? Was the sample size justified on the basis of a power analysis or other rationale?

 

Qualitative Sampling Designs

  • Is the setting or study group adequately described? Is the setting appropriate for the research question?
  • Are the sample selection procedures described? What type of sampling strategy was used?
  • Given the information needs of the study, was the sampling approach appropriate? Were dimensions of the phenomenon under study adequately represented?
  • Is the sample size adequate? Did the researcher stipulate that information redundancy was achieved? Do the findings suggest a richly textured and comprehensive set of data without any apparent "holes" or thin areas?

 

8.  Data Collection/Methods

 

  • Was the data collection process clearly described?
  • Was data collection conducted in a consistent way?
  • Were research controls maintained?
  • If data collectors were used, were they adequately trained?
  • If the study is qualitative, how is the credibility of the data established?
  • Is the method used to collect data compatible with the purpose of the research?
  • If a particular approach is used to guide the inquiry, does the researcher complete the study according to the process?
  • Does the researcher describe the selection of participants?
  • Are the participants who were chosen appropriate for this research question?
  • Is data collection focused on human experience?
  • Does the researcher describe data collection strategies (i.e. interview, observation, field notes)?
  • Are the procedures for collecting data made explicit?

 

Self-Reports

 

  • Does the research question lend itself to a self-report method of data collection? Would an alternative method have been more appropriate?
  • Is the degree of structure consistent with the nature of the research question?
  • Given the research question and respondent characteristics, did the researcher use the best possible mode for collecting the data (i.e., personal interviews, telephone interviews, or self-administered questionnaires)?
  • Do the questions included in the instrument or topic guide adequately cover the complexities of the problem under investigation?
  • If a composite scale was used, does its use seem appropriate? Does the scale adequately capture the target research variable?
  • If a vignette, projective technique, or Q sort was used, does its use seem appropriate?

 

Observational Methods

 

  • Does the research question lend itself to an observational approach? Would an alternative method have been more appropriate?
  • Is the degree of structure consistent with the nature of the research question?
  • To what degree were observers concealed during data collection? If there was no concealment, what effect might the observers' presence have had on the behaviors being observed?
  • What was the focus of the observation? How much inference was required on the part of the observers, and to what extent did this affect the potential for bias?
  • Where did the observations take place? To what extent did the setting influence the naturalness of the behaviors observed?
  • How were data actually recorded (e.g., on field notes, checklists)? Did the recording procedure appear appropriate?
  • What was the plan by which events or behaviors were sampled? Did this plan appear appropriate?
  • What steps were taken to minimize observer biases?

 

Biophysiologic Methods

  • Does the research question lend itself to a biophysiologic approach? Would an alternative method have been theoretically more appropriate?
  • Was the proper instrumentation used to obtain the biophysiologic measurements? Would an alternative instrument or method have been more appropriate?
  • Does the researcher appear to have the skills necessary for proper interpretation of the biophysiologic measures?

 

9.  Validity and Reliability of Instruments

 

  • Were the measurement strategies clearly identified and described?
  • What level of measurement was achieved by each instrument?
  • Was the reliability of each measurement method adequate?
  • Was the validity of each measurement method adequate?
  • If physiological instruments were used, were they accurate and precise?
  • If observers were used is evidence of inter-rater reliability given?

 

10.  Data Analysis

 

Quantitative Analyses

 

  • What kind of data were collected?  (nominal, ordinal, interval/ratio?)
  • What statistics were used to describe the characteristics of the sample?
  • Are the data analysis procedures clearly described?
  • Did the statistics address the purpose of the study?
  • Did the statistics address the objectives, questions or hypotheses of the study?
  • Were the statistics appropriate for the level of measurement of each variable?
  • Were tables included?  If so, was the information presented in the tables also discussed in the text? Is information in the text and tables totally redundant? Are the tables clear, with a good title and carefully labeled headings?  Do tables serve to clarify or enhance the data presentation?
  • Does the report include any descriptive statistics? Do these statistics sufficiently describe the major characteristics of the researcher's data set?
  • Were the correct descriptive statistics used? (e.g., were percentages reported when a mean would have been more informative?)
  • Does the report include any inferential statistical tests? If not, should it have (e.g., were groups compared without information on the statistical significance of group differences)?
  • Was a statistical test performed for each of the hypotheses or research questions?
  • Do the selected statistical tests appear to be appropriate (e.g., are the tests appropriate for the level of measurement of key variables)?
  • Were the results of any statistical tests significant? Nonsignificant? What do the tests tell you about the plausibility of the research hypotheses?
  • Is the researcher sufficiently objective in reporting the results?

 

Qualitative Analyses

  • Based on; information in the report regarding either the analysis strategy or the research tradition, what type of analysis style appears to have been used?
  • Is the initial categorization scheme described? If so, does the scheme appear logical and complete? Was the scheme validated in any way (e.g., did more than one person develop it collaboratively)?
  • Who coded the data--the researcher or assistants? Did the report indicate that efforts were made to determine interrater reliability of the coding?
  • Does the report describe the process by which an integrated thematic analysis was performed? What major themes emerged? If excerpts from the data are provided, do the themes appear to capture the meaning of the narratives (i.e., does it appear that the researcher adequately interpreted the data and conceptualized the themes)?
  • Is the analysis parsimonious--could two or more themes be collapsed into a broader and perhaps more useful conceptualization?
  • What evidence does the report provide that the researcher's analysis is accurate and replicable?
  • Were data displayed in a manner that allows you to verify the researcher's conclusions? Was a conceptual map, model, or diagram effectively displayed to communicate important processes?
  • Was the context of the phenomenon adequately described? Does the report give you a clear picture of the social or emotional world of the study participants?
  • If the result of the study is an emergent theory or conceptualization, does it seem trivial or obvious? Does the scheme yield a meaningful and insightful picture of the phenomenon under study?

 

11.  Interpretive Analysis/Discussion

 

  • Does the discussion section offer conclusions or interpretations for all the important results?
  • If there were hypotheses, were they supported or refuted?  How are the findings interpreted?
  • Are the findings discussed in relation to each objective, question or hypothesis? 
  • Are the findings clinically significant, and did the author address the issue of clinical versus statistical significance?
  • To what population were the findings generalized?
  • State the limitations of the study (methodological problems).  Did the author note all major limitations of the study?  What other limitations did you identify?
  • Are alternative explanations for the findings mentioned and is the rationale for their rejection discussed?
  • Did the author over-generalize the research findings from the sample to the total population?  State a rationale for your answer.
  • Are any warranted interpretations of causality made?
  • Is there evidence of bias in the interpretation?
  • In quantitative studies, does the interpretation distinguish between practical and statistical significance?
  • Are generalizations made that are not warranted on the basis of the sample used?
  • Does the researcher offer implications of the research for nursing practice, nursing theory, or nursing research? Are the implications appropriate, given the study's limitations?
  • Are specific recommendations for practice or future studies made? Are the recommendations consistent with the findings and consistent with the body of knowledge on the topic?

 

 

Evaluation Method Research Critique

 

 

Criteria                                            Maximum Points

 

1.  Initial Critique                                                                   10

                                               

2.  Purpose, Objectives,                                                         10

          Hypotheses, Questions

 

3.  Literature Review                                                             10

 <