Critiquing a qualitative research article
November 3rd, 2015
A qualitative research paper based on an article that I will send please follow all in depth instructions. It is critiquing a qualitative research article. i will also send a qualitative questions that need to be answered throughout the paper. it has to be 8 pages maximum. Introduction has to be maximum 2 pages and conclusion has to be max 3 pages please look at the instructions properly and follow all requirements. I really want at least 80-90% on this assignment.
Comments from Support Team:
SECTION |
APPRAISAL QUESTIONS | Yes/No |
| Â
Introduction |
||
| Statement of the problem | Is the phenomenon of interest clearly identified? | |
| Does the problem have significance for nursing? | ||
| Is there a good match between the research problem and the paradigm and methods used? Is a qualitative approach appropriate? | ||
| Literature review | Does the report summarize the existing body of knowledge related to the problem or phenomenon of interest? | |
| Does the literature review lay a solid basis for the new study? | ||
| Research questions | Are the research questions explicitly stated? If not, is their absence justified? | |
| Summary of strength and weaknesses (expand this section as needed)
|
||
|
Method |
||
| Research design and research tradition | Is the identified research tradition (if any) congruent with the methods used to collect and analyze data? | |
| Was there evidence of reflexivity in the design? | ||
| Sample and setting | Was the approach used to gain access to the site or to recruit participants appropriate? | |
| Was the best possible method of sampling used to enhance information richness and address the needs of the study? | ||
| Data collection | Were the methods of gathering data appropriate? | |
| 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? | ||
| Was saturation reached? | ||
| Trustworthiness | Were data collected in a manner that minimized bias or behavioural distortions? Were data collection staff appropriately trained? | |
| Were methods used to enhance the trustworthiness of the data (and analysis), and was the description of those methods adequate? | ||
| Ethics | Were appropriate procedures used to safeguard the rights of study participants? | |
| Summary of strength and weaknesses (expand this section as needed)
|
||
|
Results |
||
| Data analysis | Were the data management (e.g., coding) and data analysis methods sufficiently described? | |
| Was the data analysis strategy compatible with the research tradition and with the nature and type of the data gathered? | ||
| Did the analysis yield an appropriate “product†(e.g., theory, themes)? | ||
| Findings | Were the findings effectively summarized, with good use of excerpts? Were figures, maps, or models used effectively to summarize conceptualizations? | |
| Did the analysis yield an insightful, provocative, and meaningful picture of the phenomenon under investigation? | ||
| Summary of strength and weaknesses (expand this section as needed)
|
||
|
Discussion |
||
| Interpretations of findings | Are the findings interpreted and discussed within the context of prior studies? | |
| Are study limitations identified? Are the interpretations consistent with the study’s limitations? | ||
| Does the report address the issue of the transferability of the findings? | ||
| Implications/
recommendations |
Do the researchers discuss the implications of the study for clinical practice, education, and/or further research? | |
| Are the implications and/or recommendations identified reasonable in light of the study findings? | ||
| Summary of strength and weaknesses (expand this section as needed)
Â
|
||
