A research critique demonstrates your ability to critically read an investigative study. For this assignment, choose a research article related to nursing.
- Articles used for this assignment cannot be used for the other assignments (students should find new research articles for each new assignment).
- The selected articles should be original research articles. Review articles, concept analysis, meta-analysis, meta-synthesis, integrative review, and systemic review should not be used.
- Mixed-methods studies should not be used.
- Dissertations should not be used.
Your critique should include the following:
Research Problem/Purpose
Save your time - order a paper!
Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlines
Order Paper Now
- State the problem clearly as it is presented in the report.
- Have the investigators placed the study problem within the context of existing knowledge?
- Will the study solve a problem relevant to nursing?
- State the purpose of the research.
Review of the Literature
- Identify the concepts explored in the literature review.
- Were the references current? If not, what do you think the reasons are?
- Was there evidence of reflexivity in the design (qualitative)?
Theoretical Framework
- Are the theoretical concepts defined and related to the research?
- Does the research draw solely on nursing theory or does it draw on theory from other disciplines?
- Is a theoretical framework stated in this research piece?
- If not, suggest one that might be suitable for the study.
Variables/Hypotheses/Questions/Assumptions (Quantitative)
- What are the independent and dependent variables in this study?
- Are the operational definitions of the variables given? If so, are they concrete and measurable?
- Is the research question or the hypothesis stated? What is it?
Conceptual Underpinnings, Research Questions (Qualitative)
- Are key concepts defined conceptually?
- Is the philoosoophical basis, underlying tradition, conoceptual framework, or ideological orientation made explicit and is it appropriate for the problem?
- Are research questions explicitly stated? Are the questions consistent with the study’s philosophical basis, underlying tradition, conceptual framework, or ideological orientation?
Methodology
- What type of design (quantitative, qualitative, and type) was used in this study?
- Was inductive or deductive reasoning used in this study?
- State the sample size and study population, sampling method, and study setting.
- Did the investigator choose a probability or non-probability sample?
- State the type of reliability and the validity of the measurement tools (quantitative only)
Qualitative studies (answer the following questions in addition to those above except the last bulleted item)
- Were the methods of gathering data appropriate?
- Were data gathered through two or more methods to achieve triangulation?
- Did the researcher ask the right questions or make the right observations and were they recorded in an appropriate fashion?
- Was a sufficient amount of data gathered?
- Was the data of sufficient depth and richness?
Were ethical considerations addressed? Were appropriate procedures used to safeguard the rights of study participants?
Data Analysis
- What data analysis tool was used?
- Was saturation achieved? (qualitative)
- How were the results presented in the study?
- Were the data management (e.g., coding) and data analysis methods sufficiently described? (qualitative)
- Identify at least one (1) finding.
Summary/Conclusions, Implications, and Recommendations
- Do the themes adequately capture the meaning of the data?
- Did the analysis yield an insightful, provocative and meaningful picture of the phenomenon under investigation?
- Were methods used to enhance the trustworthiness of the data (and analysis) and was the description of those methods adequate?
- Are there clear explanation of the boundaries/limitations, thick description, audit trail?
- What are the strengths and limitations of the study?
- In terms of the findings, can the researcher generalize to other populations? Explain.
- Evaluate the findings and conclusions as to their significance for nursing (both qualitative and quantitative).
The body of your paper should be 4–6 double-spaced pages plus a cover page and a reference page. The critique must be attached to the article and follow APA guidelines.
Need APA Help?
You must submit the research study articles along with your assignment.
Visit the Student Resources tab or the WCU Library tab at the top of this page.
Review the rubric for further information on how your assignment will be graded.
Points: 280
Rubric
NURS350-Research Critique
| NURS350-Research Critique |
| Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeResearch Problem/Purpose |
| 28 to >24.92 pts
Research problem, purpose of research, and relevance to nursing are clearly identified. |
24.92 to >21.0 pts
Research problem, purpose of research, and relevance to nursing are somewhat identified. |
21 to >16.52 pts
Research problem, purpose of research, and relevance to nursing are mostly absent or misidentified. |
16.52 to >0 pts
Research problem, purpose of research, and relevance to nursing are absent. |
|
28 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReview of the Literature |
| 42 to >37.38 pts
Concepts explored in the literature review are clearly identified. Critique of the references is included and well developed. |
37.38 to >31.5 pts
Concepts explored in the literature review are somewhat identified. Critique of the references is included, but may not be fully developed. |
31.5 to >24.78 pts
Concepts explored in the literature review are misidentified. Critique of the references is severely lacking. |
24.78 to >0 pts
Concepts explored in the literature review are absent. Critique of the references is absent. |
|
42 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTheoretical Framework |
| 28 to >24.92 pts
A theoretical concept/framework is identified and well analyzed for appropriateness. If the article lacks a concept/framework, a suitable one is suggested. |
24.92 to >21.0 pts
A theoretical concept/framework is somewhat identified and analyzed for appropriateness. If the article lacks a concept/framework, a potential concept/framework is suggested, but it is somewhat inappropriate. |
21 to >16.52 pts
A theoretical concept/framework is somewhat identified and analyzed for appropriateness. If the article lacks a concept/framework, a potential concept/framework is suggested, is not identified or is grossly inappropriate. |
16.52 to >0 pts
A theoretical concept/framework is misidentified or not analyzed for appropriateness. |
|
28 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeVariables, Hypotheses, Questions, and Assumptions |
| 14 to >12.46 pts
IV and DV are identified and defined. Discussion on measurability is included. Research question and hypothesis are identified. |
12.46 to >10.5 pts
IV and DV are somewhat identified and or partially defined. Discussion on measurability is somewhat included. Research question and hypothesis are partially identified. |
10.5 to >8.26 pts
IV and DV identification and definition are absent or severely lacking. Discussion on measurability is absent or inaccurate. Research question and hypothesis are not identified or grossly misidentified. |
8.26 to >0 pts
IV and DV identification and definition are absent. Discussion on measurability is absent. Research question and hypothesis are not identified. |
|
14 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMethodology |
| 56 to >49.84 pts
Type of design, sample size, study population, sampling method, and type of reasoning are properly identified. Reliability and validity of measurement tools, ethical considerations, and probability vs. non-probability sampling are discussed. |
49.84 to >42.0 pts
Type of design, sample size, study population, sampling method, and type of reasoning are somewhat identified. Reliability and validity of measurement tools, ethical considerations, and probability vs. non-probability sampling are discussed, but some information is inaccurate. |
42 to >33.04 pts
Type of design, sample size, study population, sampling method, and type of reasoning are absent or misidentified. Reliability and validity of measurement tools, ethical considerations, and probability vs. non-probability sampling are either absent or grossly inaccurate. |
33.04 to >0 pts
Type of design, sample size, study population, sampling method, and type of reasoning are absent. Reliability and validity of measurement tools, ethical considerations, and probability vs. non-probability sampling are absent. |
|
56 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeData Analysis |
| 42 to >37.38 pts
Data analysis tool is identified. An explanation on how the results are presented in the study is included and accurate. At least one finding is appropriately identified. |
37.38 to >31.5 pts
Data analysis tool is somewhat identified. An incomplete explanation on how the results are presented in the study is included. At least one finding is identified. |
31.5 to >24.78 pts
Data analysis tool is absent or misidentified. An explanation on how the results are presented in the study is absent or grossly unclear. Findings are not included or are grossly inaccurate. |
24.78 to >0 pts
Data analysis tool is absent. An explanation on how the results are presented in the study is absent. Findings are not included. |
|
42 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSummary, Conclusions, Implications, and Recommendations |
| 56 to >49.84 pts
Strengths and limitations of the study are identified. A discussion on whether or not the study can be generalized is included. An evaluation of the findings, conclusions, and significance to nursing is included and appropriate. |
49.84 to >42.0 pts
Strengths and limitations of the study are somewhat identified. A discussion on whether or not the study can be generalized is included but may not be fully developed. An evaluation of the findings, conclusions, and significance to nursing may not be fully developed. |
42 to >33.04 pts
Strengths and limitations of study are absent or lacking. A discussion on whether or not the study can be generalized is absent or lacking. An evaluation of the findings, conclusions, and significance to nursing is absent or inappropriate. |
33.04 to >0 pts
Strengths and limitations of study are absent. A discussion on whether or not the study can be generalized is absent. An evaluation of the findings, conclusions, and significance to nursing is absent. |
|
56 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMechanics and APA Format |
| 14 to >12.46 pts
Written in a clear, concise, formal, and organized manner. Responses are mostly error free. Information from sources is appropriately paraphrased and accurately cited. |
12.46 to >10.5 pts
Writing is generally clear and organized but is not concise or formal in language. Multiple errors exist in spelling and grammar with minor interference with readability or comprehension. Most information from sources is correctly paraphrased and cited. |
10.5 to >8.26 pts
Writing is generally unclear and unorganized. Some errors in spelling and grammar detract from readability and comprehension. Sources are missing or improperly cited. |
8.26 to >0 pts
Writing is unclear and unorganized. Errors in spelling and grammar detract from readability and comprehension. Sources are missing. |
|
14 pts |
| Total Points: 280 |
