Top Banner
CRITIQUING RESEARCH DR. JAYESH PATIDAR www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.com
40
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Critiquing research

CRITIQUING

RESEARCH

DR. JAYESH PATIDAR

www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.com

Page 2: Critiquing research

CRITIQUING RESEARCH

Page 3: Critiquing research

WHAT IS RESEARCH

CRITIQUE?

• A critical evaluation /

appraisal of a research

report.

3www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 4: Critiquing research

RESEARCH CRITIQUE

– DEFINITION

“Systematic, unbiased, careful

examination of all aspects of a study to

judge the merits, limitations, meaning

and significance based on previous

research experience and knowledge of

the topic”

- Burns, N. & Grove, S., 2005.4www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 5: Critiquing research

Requires

• critical thinking,

• appraisal &

• intellectual skill

RESEARCH CRITIQUE …

5www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 6: Critiquing research

Importance of research

critique • To broaden understanding for use

in practice.

• For implementing an evidence-

based nursing practice.

• Encourages nurses to participate

in clinical inquiry and provide

evidence for use in practice.6www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 7: Critiquing research

PURPOSES OF CRITIQUE

• To assess students’ methodological

and analytical skills (identify

limitations & strengths).

• Seasoned researcher to help journal

editions

• Written critique is a guide to

researcher

• To advance nursing knowledge &

profession

7www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 8: Critiquing research

APPROACHES FOR

CRITIQUING

Principles

Be objective: make

comments specific to the

work you are reviewing

Be constructive: Critique

should be an advisory and

constructive nature

8www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 9: Critiquing research

CRITIQUE PROCESS

Comprehension

Comparison

Analysis

Evaluation

Conceptual clustering

9www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 10: Critiquing research

GENERAL GUIDELINES

Read & critique the entire study

Be objective & realistic

Comment on strengths and weakness

Give specific examples

Suggest alternatives

10www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 11: Critiquing research

GENERAL GUIDELINES

Use positive terms whenever possible and say the positive points first

Avoid vague generalizations of praise and fault findings

Be sensitive in handling negative comments

Evaluate substantive, ethical, methodologic, interpretative & presentational dimensions

11www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 12: Critiquing research

INITIAL CRITIQUE

What type of study was

conducted?

What was the setting?

Were the steps clearly

identified?

Was there a logical flow?12www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 13: Critiquing research

ELEMENTS OF A RESEARCH

CRITIQUE

Substantive & theoretical

dimensions

Methodologic dimensions

Ethical dimensions

Interpretive dimensions

Presentation / stylistic dimensions

13www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 14: Critiquing research

CRITERIA: INTRODUCTION

Is the purpose of the study

presented?

Is the significance (importance)

of the problem discussed?

Does the investigator provide a

sense of what he or she is

doing and why?

14www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 15: Critiquing research

PROBLEM STATEMENT

Is the problem statement clear?

Does the investigator identify

key research questions and

variables to be examined?

Does the study have the

potential to help solve a

problem that is currently faced

in clinical practice?

15www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 16: Critiquing research

LITERATURE REVIEW

Does literature review follow a logical

sequence leading to a critical review

of supporting and conflicting prior

work?

Is the relationship of the study to

previous research clear?

Does the investigator describe gaps

in the literature and support the

necessity of the present study?

16www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 17: Critiquing research

Theoretical/Conceptual

Framework: Check if conceptual framework described?

If not, does it detract from the research?

Are the concepts to be studied identified

and defined?

Are measures for each of the concepts

identified and described?

Does the research problem flow naturally

from the conceptual framework?17www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 18: Critiquing research

RESEARCH QUESTIONS/HYPOTHESES

Are research questions or hypotheses

formally stated?

Do the research questions and

hypotheses naturally flow from the

research problem and theoretical

framework?

Does each research question or

hypothesis contain at least two

variables?

Are the research questions or

hypotheses worded clearly and

objectively?18www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 19: Critiquing research

METHODOLOGY

Are the relevant variables and concepts clearly and operationally defined?

Is the design appropriate for the research questions or hypotheses?

Are methods of data collection sufficiently described?

What are the identified and potential threats to internal and external validity that were present in the study?

If there was more than one data collector, was the inter-rater reliability adequate?

19www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 20: Critiquing research

SAMPLE

Are the subjects and sampling

methods described?

Is the sample of sufficient size for the

study, given the number of variables

and design?

Is there adequate assurance that the

rights of human subjects were

protected?

20www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 21: Critiquing research

INSTRUMENTS

Are appropriate instruments for

data collection used?

Are reliability and validity of the

instruments adequate?

21www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 22: Critiquing research

DATA ANALYSIS

Are the statistical tests used identified and

the values reported?

Are appropriate statistics used, according to

level of measurement, sample size, sampling

method, and hypotheses / research

questions?

22www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 23: Critiquing research

RESULTS

Are the results for each hypothesis clearly

and objectively presented?

Do the figures and tables illuminate the

presentation of results?

Are results described in light of the

theoretical framework and supporting

literature?

23www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 24: Critiquing research

Conclusions / discussion

Are conclusions based on the results and

related to the hypotheses?

Are study limitations identified?

Are generalizations made within the scope of

the findings?

Are implications of findings discussed (i.e.,

for practice, education and research)?

Are recommendations for further research

stated?

24www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 25: Critiquing research

RESEARCH UTILIZATION

IMPLICATIONS

Is the study of sufficient quality to

meet the criterion of scientific merit?

Does the study meet the criterion of

replicability?

Is the study of relevance to practice?

Is the study feasible for nurses to

implement?

Do the benefits of the study outweigh

the risks?

25www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 26: Critiquing research

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

EVALUATION

26www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 27: Critiquing research

STATEMENT OF THE

PHENOMENON OF INTEREST

Is the phenomenon of interest clearly identified?

Has the researcher identified why the phenomenon requires a qualitative format?

Has the research described the philosophic underpinnings of the research?

27www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 28: Critiquing research

PURPOSE

Has the research made explicit

the purpose of conducting the

research?

Does the researcher describe the

projected significance of the

work to nursing?

28www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 29: Critiquing research

METHOD

Is the method used to collect data

compatible with the purpose of the

research?

Is the method adequate to address the

phenomenon of interest?

If a particular approach is used to

guide the inquiry, does the researcher

complete the study according to the

processes described?

29www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 30: Critiquing research

SAMPLING

Does the researcher describe

the selection of participants? Is

purposive sampling used?

Are the informants who were

chosen appropriate for

research?

30www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 31: Critiquing research

DATA COLLECTION

Is data collection focused on human experience?

Does the researcher describe data collection strategies (i.e. interview, observation, field notes)?

Is protection of human participants addressed?

Is saturation of the data described?

Has the researcher made explicit the procedures for collecting data ?

31www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 32: Critiquing research

DATA ANALYSIS

Does the researcher describe the

strategies used to analyze the data?

Has the researcher remained true to the

data?

Does the reader understand the

procedures used to analyze the data?

Does researcher address the credibility,

auditability, and fittingness of the data?

32www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 33: Critiquing research

DATA ANALYSIS Credibility

Do the participants recognize the experience astheir own?

Auditability Can the reader follow the researcher’s thinking?

Does the researcher document the researchprocess?

Fittingness Can the findings be applicable outside the study

situation?

Are the results meaningful to individuals not involved in the research?

Is the strategy used for analysis compatible with the purpose of the study?

33www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 34: Critiquing research

FINDINGS

Are the findings presented within a

context?

Is the reader able to grasp the

essence of the experience from the

report of the findings?

Are the researcher’s

conceptualization true to the data?

Does the researcher place the report

in the context of what already is

known about the phenomenon?

34www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 35: Critiquing research

CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION &

RECOMMENDATIONS

Do the conclusions, implications and

recommendations give the reader a

context in which to use the findings?

Do the conclusions reflect the study

findings?

Does the researcher offer

recommendations for future study?

Has the researcher made explicit the

significance of the study to nursing?

35www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 36: Critiquing research

STYLES IN WRITING

More formal, impersonal fashion and

use passive voice

Make concluding evaluation statement

as to the overall worth and relevance

of the study

36www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 37: Critiquing research

So….

Research is the best possible means of

answering many questions, no single

study can provide conclusive evidence

Evidence is accumulated through the

conduct & evaluation of several

studies

Reader who can do reflective and

thorough critiques of research reports

play a role in advancing nursing

knowledge

37www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 38: Critiquing research

A word about your style: let your

presentation be well reasoned and

objective. If you passionately disagree

(or agree) with the author, let your

passion inspire you to new heights of

thorough research and reasoned

argument.

IN CONCLUSION…..

38www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 39: Critiquing research

REFERENCES• Burns N, Grove SK. The Practice of Nursing Research

conduct, critique & utilization. 5 ed. W.B. Saunders

Company: Philadelphia; 2005.

• Bush CT. Nursing Research. 1 ed. Reston Publishing

company: Inc. Virginia; 1985.

• Hicks CM. Research Methods for Clinical Therapists –

applied project design and analysis. 3 ed. Churchill

Livingstone: London; 1999.

• Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing Research Principles and

Methods. 7 ed. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins company:

Philadelphia; 2004.

• Talbot LA. Principles and practice of Nursing Research. 1

ed. Mosby Year book Inc: St Louis; 1995.39www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in

Page 40: Critiquing research

THANK YOU

40www.drjayeshpatidar.blogspot.in