Loading

Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies

Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies

Critiquing the validity and robustness of research featured in journal articles provides a critical foundation for engaging in evidence-based practice. For this Assignment,you critique a quantitative and either a qualitative or a mixed methods research study and compare the types of information obtained in each. To prepare: •Select a health topic of interest to you that is relevant to your current area of practice. The topic may be your Course Portfolio Project or a different topic of your choice. •Using the Walden Library, locate two articles in scholarly journals that deal with your portfolio topic: 1) Select one article that utilizes a quantitative research design and 2) select a second article that utilizes either a qualitative OR a mixed methods design. These need to be single studies not systematic or integrative reviews (including meta-analysis and metasynthesis). You may use research articles from your reference list. If you cannot find these two types of research on your portfolio topic, you may choose another topic.

•Locate the following documents in this week’s Learning Resources to access the appropriate templates, which will guide your critique of each article: ◦Critique Template for a Qualitative Study

◦Critique Template for a Quantitative Study ◦Critique Template for a Mixed-Methods Study •Consider the fields in the templates as you review the information in each article.

•Begin to draft a paper in which you analyze the two research approaches as indicated below. •Reflect on the overall value of both quantitative and qualitative research. If someone were to say to you, “Qualitative research is not real science,” how would you respond? To complete this Assignment: •Complete the two critiques using the appropriate templates.

•Write a 2- to 3-page paper that addresses the following:

◦Contrast the types of information that you gained from examining the two different research approaches in the articles that you selected.

◦Describe the general advantages and disadvantages of the two research approaches featured in the articles. Use examples from the articles for support.

◦Formulate a response to the claim that qualitative research is not real science. Highlight the general insights that both quantitative and qualitative studies can provide to researchers. Support your response with references to the Learning Resources and other credible sources. As you complete this Assignment, remember to:

1. Combine all three parts of this assignment into one Word document including both critique templates and the narrative with your references. Submit this has a combined document. note please follow this format 2 pages for the Quantitative Study. 2 pages for the Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies 2 pages that addresses the following:

◦Contrast the types of information that you gained from examining the two different research approaches in the articles that you selected.

◦Describe the general advantages and disadvantages of the two research approaches featured in the articles. Use examples from the articles for support.

◦Formulate a response to the claim that qualitative research is not real science. Highlight the general insights that both quantitative and qualitative studies can provide to researchers. Support your response with references to the Learning Resources and other credible sources.

I will send a sample of the critique to manage orders thanks please article should be from 2009 to 2016 login to walden libary is Username: adedoyin.aderonmu@waldenu.edu password: Adeoyin04 Readings

•Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2012). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (Laureate Education, Inc., custom ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

◦Chapter 10, “Rigor and Validity in Quantitative Research” This chapter introduces the concept of validity in research and describes the different types of validity that must be addressed. Key threats to validity are also explored. ◦Chapter 11, “Specific Types of Quantitative Research” This chapter focuses on the specific types of quantitative research that can be selected. The focus is on the purpose of the research rather than the research design. These include such approaches as clinical trials, evaluation research, health services and outcomes research, needs assessments, or replication studies.

•Cantrell, M. A. (2011). Demystifying the research process: Understanding a descriptive comparative research design. Pediatric Nursing, 37(4), 188–189. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases. (for review) The author of this article discusses the primary aspects of a prominent quantitative research design. The article examines the advantages and disadvantages of the design.

•Schultz, L. E., Rivers, K. O., & Ratusnik, D. L. (2008). The role of external validity in evidence-based practice for rehabilitation. Rehabilitation Psychology, 53(3), 294–302. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases. This article details the results of a study that sought to balance concern for rigor with concern for relevance. The authors of the article derive and determine a rating format for relevance and apply it to cognitive rehabilitation.

•Metheny, N. A., Davis-Jackson, J., & Stewart, B. J. (2010). Effectiveness of an aspiration risk-reduction protocol. Nursing Research, 59(1), 18–25. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases. •Padula, C. A., Hughes, C., & Baumhover, L. (2009). Impact of a nurse-driven mobility protocol on functional decline in hospitalized older adults. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 24(4), 325–331. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

•Yuan, S.-C., Chou, M.-C., Hwu, L.-J., Chang, Y.-O,, Hsu, W.-H., & Kuo, H.-W. (2009). An intervention program to promote health-related physical fitness in nurses. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 18(10), 1,404–1,411. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

•Walden University. (n.d.a.). Paper templates. Retrieved July 23, 2012, from http://writingcenter.waldenu.edu/57.htm This resource provides you access to the School of Nursing Sample Paper, which will serve as a template for formatting your papers.

•Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2012). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (Laureate Education, Inc., custom ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. ◦Chapter 20, “Qualitative Research Design and Approaches” This chapter introduces qualitative research designs. It provides an overview of the different types of qualitative research and then describes each one in greater detail, outlining how and when they should be used.

•Houghton, C. E., Casey, D., Shaw, D., & Murphy, K. (2010). Ethical challenges in qualitative research: Examples from practice. Nurse Researcher, 18(1), 15–25. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases. This article explores ethical challenges associated with qualitative research. Specifically, the authors examine the challenges of informed consent procedures, the researcher-participant relationship, risk-benefit ratio, confidentiality, and the dual role of the nurse-researcher.

•Pringle, J., Hendry, C., & McLafferty, E. (2011). Phenomenological approaches: Challenges and choices. Nurse Researcher, 18(2), 7–18. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases. This article examines the dilemmas faced by a researcher looking for appropriate methods and approaches for investigating the experiences of stroke survivors. In addition, this article reviews the challenges of using phenomenology as a research method.

•Ryan-Nicholls, K. D., & Will, C. I. (2009). Rigour in qualitative research: Mechanisms for control. Nurse Researcher, 16(3), 70–85. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases. The authors of this article provide recommendations for improving the control mechanisms of methodological rigor in qualitative research methods. The text establishes the basis of criticism on the rigor of qualitative work, ways of demonstrating methodological rigor, and the definition of rigor.

•Smith, J., Bekker, H., & Cheater, F. (2011). Theoretical versus pragmatic design in qualitative research. Nurse Researcher, 18(2), 39–51. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases. This article assesses the benefits of using a generic qualitative approach to design studies for understanding user and caregiver perspectives. The authors assess these benefits in the context of a qualitative study that focused on parents’ experience of living with children with hydrocephalus.

•Walker, W. (2011). Hermeneutic inquiry: Insights into the process of interviewing. Nurse Researcher, 18(2), 19–27. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases. This article examines the process of interviewing from a research perspective. The authors supply personal and theoretical insights into using the research interview, along with a guide to the practicalities of interviewing.

•Williamson, K. M. (2009). Evidence-based practice: Critical appraisal of qualitative evidence. Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association, 15(3), 202–207. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases. This article highlights the importance of qualitative evidence to mental health clinicians. The author stresses that critically appraising evidence is crucial to the EBP process and provides guidelines for appraisal.

•Wuest, J. (2011). Are we there yet? Positioning qualitative research differently. Qualitative Health Research, 21(7), 875–883. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases. This article focuses on the shifting role of qualitative research in the past two decades. The author discusses the merits and detriments of concrete distinctions, the hurdles of flexibility and convergence, and the need to develop a complete research toolbox for improving health. Critique Template for a Qualitative Study NURS 6052 Week 6 Assignment: Application: Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies (due by Day 7 of Week 7) Date: Your name: Article reference (in APA style): URL: What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study. When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these:

• Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation?

• What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness?

• How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice? To help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research study of your choice. If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor.

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE

1. Research Issue and Purpose What is the research question or issue of the referenced study? What is its purpose? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the question must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.)

2. Researcher Pre-understandings Does the article include a discussion of the researcher’s pre-understandings? What does the article disclose about the researcher’s professional and personal perspectives on the research problem?

3. Literature Review What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current, relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.)

4. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework Is a theoretical or conceptual framework identified? If so, what is it? Is it a nursing framework or one drawn from another discipline? (Sometimes there is no explicitly identified theoretical or conceptual framework; in addition, many “nursing” research studies draw on a “borrowed” framework, e.g., stress, medical pathology, etc.)

5. Participants Who were the participants? Is the setting or study group adequately described? Is the setting appropriate for the research question? What type of sampling strategy was used? Was it appropriate? Was the sample size adequate? Did the researcher stipulate that information redundancy was achieved?

6. Protection of Human Research Participants What steps were taken to protect human research subjects?

7. Research Design What was the design of the study? If the design was modeled from previous research or pilot studies, please describe.

8. Data Collection/Generation Methods What methods were used for data collection/generation? Was triangulation used?

9. Credibility Were the generated data credible? Explain your reasons.

10. Data Analysis What methods were used for data analysis? What evidence was provided that the researcher’s analysis was accurate and replicable?

11. Findings What were the findings?

12. Discussion of Findings Was the discussion of findings related to the framework? Were those the expected findings? Were they consistent with previous studies? Were serendipitous (i.e., accidental) findings described?

13. Limitations Did the researcher report limitations of the study? (Limitations are acknowledgments of internal characteristics of the study that may help explain insignificant and other unexpected findings, and more importantly, indicate those groups to whom the findings CANNOT be generalized or applied. It is a fact that all studies must be limited in some way; not all of the issues involved in a problem situation can be studied all at once.)

14. Implications Are the conclusions and implications drawn by the author warranted by the study findings? (Sometimes researchers will seem to ignore findings that don’t confirm their expectations as they interpret the meaning of their study findings.)

15. Recommendations Does the author offer legitimate recommendations for further research? Is the description of the study sufficiently clear and complete to allow replication of the study? (Sometimes researchers’ recommendations seem to come from “left field” rather than following obviously from the discussion of findings. If a research problem is truly significant, the results need to be confirmed with additional research; in addition, if a reader wishes to design a study using a different sample or correcting flaws in the original study, a complete description is necessary.)

16. Research Utilization in Your Practice How might this research inform your practice? Are the research findings appropriate to your practice setting and situation? What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness? How might the utilization of this research trigger changes in other aspects of practice? Critique Template for a Quantitative Study NURS 6052 Week 6 Assignment: Application: Critiquing

Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies (due by Day 7 of Week 7) Date: Your name: Article reference (in APA style): URL: What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study. When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these:

• Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation?

• What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness?

• How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice? To help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods research study of your choice. If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor.

QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE

1. Research Problem and Purpose What are the problem and purpose of the referenced study? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the problem must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.)

2. Hypotheses and Research Questions What are the hypotheses (or research questions/objectives) of the study? (Sometimes the hypotheses or study questions are listed in the Results section, rather than preceding the report of the methodology used. Occasionally, there will be no mention of hypotheses, but anytime there are inferential statistics used, the reader can recognize what the hypotheses are from looking at the results of statistical analysis.)

3. Literature Review What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current? Relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.)

4. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework Is a theoretical or conceptual framework identified? If so, what is it? Is it a nursing framework or one drawn from another discipline? (Sometimes there is no explicitly identified theoretical or conceptual framework; in addition, many “nursing” research studies draw on a “borrowed” framework, e.g., stress, medical pathology, etc.)

5. Population What population was sampled? How was the population sampled? Describe the method and criteria. How many subjects were in the sample?

6. Protection of Human Research Participants What steps were taken to protect human research subjects?

7. Research Design What was the design of the study? If the design was modeled from previous research or pilot studies, please describe.

8. Instruments and Strategies for Measurement What instruments and/or other measurement strategies were used in data collection? Was information provided regarding the reliability and validity of the measurement instruments? If so, describe it.

9. Data Collection What procedures were used for data collection?

10. Data Analysis What methods of data analysis were used? Were they appropriate to the design and hypotheses?

11. Interpretation of Results What results were obtained from data analysis? Is sufficient information given to interpret the results of data analysis?

12. Discussion of Findings Was the discussion of findings related to the framework? Were those the expected findings? Were they consistent with previous studies? Were serendipitous (i.e., accidental) findings described?

13. Limitations Did the researcher report limitations of the study? (Limitations are acknowledgments of internal characteristics of the study that may help explain insignificant and other unexpected findings, and more importantly, indicate those groups to whom the findings CANNOT be generalized or applied. It is a fact that all studies must be limited in some way; not all of the issues involved in a problem situation can be studied all at once.)

14. Implications Are the conclusions and implications drawn by the author warranted by the study findings? (Sometimes researchers will seem to ignore findings that don’t confirm their hypotheses as they interpret the meaning of their study findings.)

15. Recommendations Does the author offer legitimate recommendations for further research? Is the description of the study sufficiently clear and complete to allow replication of the study? (Sometimes researchers’ recommendations seem to come from “left field” rather than following obviously from the discussion of findings. If a research problem is truly significant, the results need to be confirmed with additional research; in addition, if a reader wishes to design a study using a different sample or correcting flaws in the original study, a complete description is necessary.)

16. Research Utilization in Your Practice How might this research inform your practice? Are the research findings appropriate to your practice setting and situation? What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness? How might the utilization of this research trigger changes in other aspects of practice?

Critique Template for a Mixed-Methods Study NURS 6052 Week 6 Assignment: Application: Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies (due by Day 7 of Week 7) Date: Your name: Article reference (in APA style): URL:

What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study. When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these:

• Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation?

• What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness?

• How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice? T

o help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research study of your choice. If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor.

MIXED-METHODS RESEARCH CRITIQUE

1. Research Issue and Purpose What is the research question or issue of the referenced study? What is its purpose? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the question must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.)

1. Researcher Pre-understandings and / or Hypotheses and Research Questions Does the article include a discussion of the researcher’s pre-understandings? What does the article disclose about the researcher’s professional and personal perspectives on the research problem? What are the hypotheses (or research questions/objectives) of the study? (Sometimes the hypotheses or study questions are listed in the Results section, rather than preceding the report of the methodology used. Occasionally, there will be no mention of hypotheses, but anytime there are inferential statistics used, the reader can recognize what the hypotheses are from looking at the results of statistical analysis.)

2. Literature Review What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current, relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.) 3

. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework Is a theoretical or conceptual framework identified? If so, what is it? Is it a nursing framework or one drawn from another discipline? (Sometimes there is no explicitly identified theoretical or conceptual framework; in addition, many “nursing” research studies draw on a “borrowed” framework, e.g., stress, medical pathology, etc.)

4. Participants Who were the participants? Is the setting or study group adequately described? Is the setting appropriate for the research question? What type of sampling strategy was used? Was it appropriate? Was the sample size adequate? Did the researcher stipulate that information redundancy was achieved?

5. Protection of Human Research Participants What steps were taken to protect human research subjects?

6. Research Design What was the design of the study? If the design was modeled from previous research or pilot studies, please describe.

7. Instruments, Data Collection, Data Generation Methods What methods were used for data collection/generation? What instruments and/or other measurement strategies were used in data collection?

Was information provided regarding the reliability and validity of the measurement instruments? If so, describe it. Was triangulation used?

8. Credibility Were the generated data credible? Explain your reasons.

9. Data Analysis What methods were used for data analysis? What evidence was provided that the researcher’s analysis was accurate and replicable?

10. Findings What were the findings?

11. Discussion of Findings Was the discussion of findings related to the framework? Were those the expected findings? Were they consistent with previous studies? Were serendipitous (i.e., accidental) findings described?

12. Limitations Did the researcher report limitations of the study? (Limitations are acknowledgments of internal characteristics of the study that may help explain insignificant and other unexpected findings, and more importantly, indicate those groups to whom the findings CANNOT be generalized or applied. It is a fact that all studies must be limited in some way; not all of the issues involved in a problem situation can be studied all at once.)

13. Implications Are the conclusions and implications drawn by the author warranted by the study findings? (Sometimes researchers will seem to ignore findings that don’t confirm their expectations as they interpret the meaning of their study findings.)

14. Recommendations Does the author offer legitimate recommendations for further research? Is the description of the study sufficiently clear and complete to allow replication of the study? (Sometimes researchers’ recommendations seem to come from “left field” rather than following obviously from the discussion of findings. If a research problem is truly significant, the results need to be confirmed with additional research; in addition, if a reader wishes to design a study using a different sample or correcting flaws in the original study, a complete description is necessary.)

15. Research Utilization in Your Practice How might this research inform your practice? Are the research findings appropriate to your practice setting and situation? What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness? How might the utilization of this research trigger changes in other aspects of practice?

 


PAPER DETAILS 
Course Level Masters
Subject Area Nursing
Paper Type  Article Critique
Number of Pages 6  (1650 words)
Sources 6
Paper Format APA
Spacing Double Spaced

 


ANSWER

Loader Loading...
EAD Logo Taking too long?

Reload Reload document
| Open Open in new tab

If this is not the paper you were searching for, you can order your 100% plagiarism free, custom written paper now!

papershaven.com


 

PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT

get-your-custom-paper

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Rating*

Support
Open chat
1
You can now contact our live agent via Whatsapp! via +1 518 291-4128

Feel free to ask questions, clarifications or discounts available when placing your order.
Powered by