Qualitative Reserach Critique
quality
THIS IS THE Article That needs to be critiqued: I will attach it to request
Rosedale M. (2009). Survivor loneliness of women following breast cancer. Oncology Nursing Forum. 2009 Mar;36(2):175-83. PMID: 19273406
Submit the paper in APA format (6th edition).
The following guidelines/criteria is also used to grade your qualitative research critique paper.
• Please be sure to address all questions with rationales in each section for full credit.
• You must limit your typed double-spaced critique to 8 pages or less (exclude title page and references).
• Criteria • Points
• Design (12) 1. Is the research tradition within which the qualitative study was undertaken identified? If so, what was that tradition? Is the identified research tradition (if identified) consistent with the methods used to collect and analyze data? 2. How much time was spent with the participants? Was this an adequate amount of time considering this research tradition? 3. Did the research report provide evidence of reflexivity in the design? 4. How well is the actual research design described? 5. Is the study exclusively qualitative, or were both qualitative and quantitative data collected? If both qualitative and quantitative data were collected, were they used in a complementary fashion? • /12
• Sampling Plan (12) 1. Was the group or population of interest adequately described? 2. Were the setting and sample adequately described? Is the setting appropriate for the research questions (or purpose of the study)? Was the approach used to gain access to the site or to recruit participants appropriate? 3. What type of sampling strategy was used? Was it adequately described? 4. Given the information needs of the study, was the sampling plan appropriate? (i.e., did the sampling plan enhance the collection of data that were rich in the right types of information?) 5. Is the sample size adequate? Did the researchers stipulate that information redundancy (or saturation) was achieved? 6. Do the findings suggest a richly textured and comprehensive set of data without any “holes” or thin areas? Were dimensions of the phenomenon under investigation adequately represented? • /12
• Data Collection (14) 1. Do the authors provide sufficient information regarding how data were collected? 2. Who collected data? Were the data collectors appropriate and adequately trained? 3. Where and under what circumstances were data gathered? Was the setting for data collection appropriate? 4. What type of approach (such as interview, questionnaire, observation, etc.) was used to collect data? Was the approach appropriate? Were data gathered through two or more methods to achieve triangulation? 5. How structured was the approach? Is the degree of structure consistent with the nature of the research question (or purpose)? 6. How were data recorded (e.g. field notes or checklists)? Did the recording procedure appear appropriate? 7. What steps were taken to minimize observer bias or behavioral distortions during data collection? • /14
• Data Quality (12) 1. Does the report discuss methods to enhance or evaluate the trustworthiness of the data (and analyses)? 2. What techniques (if any) did the researchers used to enhance and appraise data quality? Was triangulation used, and if so, of what type? Were peer debriefings and/or member checks used? Do the researchers’ qualifications enhance the credibility of the data? 3. Did the investigators document their procedures and decision processes sufficiently so that findings are auditable and confirmable? 4. Given the efforts to enhance data quality, what can you conclude about the trustworthiness of the data (i.e., how much faith can be placed in the results of the study)? If your conclusions are that the data are not trustworthy, what supplemental strategies would have strengthened your confidence in the study and its evidence? • /12
• Data Analysis (12) 1. Were the methods used to manage and analyze data adequately described? 2. What major products (i.e., themes, theory, taxonomy) emerged? If excerpts from the data are provided, do the themes (or concepts) appear to capture the meaning of the narratives, i.e., does it appear that the investigators adequately interpreted the data and conceptualized the themes (or concepts)? 3. What evidence does the report provide that the investigators’ analyses are accurate and replicable? 4. Were data displayed in a manner that allows you to verify the investigators’ conclusions? (i.e, was a conceptual map, model, or diagram effectively displayed to communicate important processes?) 5. Was the context of the phenomenon adequately described, i.e., does the report give you a clear picture of the social or emotional world of the study participants? 6. If the result of the study is an emergent theory or conceptualization, does it yield a meaningful and insightful picture of the phenomenon under study? • /12
• Interpretation of Research Findings (12) 1. Are the interpretations consistent with the results? Do the interpretations give due consideration to the limitations of the study? 2. Are the results interpreted in light of findings from other studies? 3. Does the report address the transferability of the findings? 4. Did the investigators discuss the implications for clinical practice or further inquiry? If so, are those implications reasonable and complete? • /12
• Presentation of Report and Summary Assessment (14) 1. Does the report include a sufficient amount of detail to permit a thorough critique? 2. Is the report well written and grammatical? Is the language understandable? Is the report well organized with an orderly, logical presentation of ideas? 3. Is the report sufficiently concise, or does the author include a lot of irrelevant details? Are important details omitted? 4. Does the report suggest overt biases? 5. Does the title of the report capture the key concepts and the population under investigation? Does the abstract adequately summarize the research problem, study methods, and important findings? 6. Does the study contribute any meaningful evidence that can be used in nursing practice or that is useful to the nursing discipline? • /14
• Writing Style of Your Critique (12) 1. Grammar, spelling, vocabulary 2. Clear and organized by the above criteria 3. Double spaced and limited to 8 pages 4. Minimal use of quotes; paraphrasing used. • /12
Do you want this essay or any other quality academic essay? You are at the right place. Our expert team of writers is on standby to deliver to you an original paper as per your specific instructions with zero plagiarism guaranteed.
