Research and Article Critique

 

Research and Article Critique

This written assignment:

You will write in sentences/paragraphs as you answer each question. APA format, e.g., margins, font, and referencing, is expected, and a cover page is required. However, do not include headings – so there will be no Introduction or Conclusion sections either. Copy the questions below onto the page following the cover page and then provide your answer immediately beneath each question. Do not include the information about allocation of marks. To help you with format, please see the document called ‘Common APA Problem Areas for Use re Research F-15’ on Moodle under ‘APA’ in the ‘Getting Started’ section.

Required text.

LoBiondo-Wood, G., Haber, J., Cameron, C., & Singh, M. D. (Eds.). (2013). Nursing research in Canada: Methods, critical appraisal, and utilization (3rd ed.). Toronto, ON: Elsevier Canada.
A. Using your course text, please answer the following questions. You must provide the appropriate reference for each answer, i.e., the author(s), year, and page number(s). The full reference for each chapter you use must also be in the reference list. Do not use direct quotes from your text book. You need to put the answers into your own words to show that you understand, rather than that you can simply copy and paste.

1. Define each of research, evidence-based practice, and evidence-informed practice. Explain the main difference between the research and the evidence-informed practice processes. (2.5 marks – 0.5 mark each for correct definitions; 0.5 mark for correctly explaining; 0.5 mark for correct APA referencing in answer and in reference list).
2. Define each of non-directional, directional, and null hypotheses. Explain what non-directional and directional have in common that is different from null. (2.5 marks – 0.5 mark each for correct definitions; 0.5 for correctly explaining; 0.5 mark for correct APA referencing in answer and in reference list).
3. Describe 2 ways in which you as a newly graduated nurse will be expected to use your research-related competencies. (1.5 marks – 0.5 mark each for correct descriptions; 0.5 mark for correct APA referencing in answer and in reference list).
4. Define each of critical thinking and critical reading. Identify and describe 1 strategy that you plan to use for each of the 4 stages of the critical reading process. (3.5 marks – 0.5 mark each for correct definitions; 0.5 mark for each correct strategy; 0.5 mark for correct APA referencing in answer and in reference list).
B. Using the qualitative article indicated in the Course Outline, please answer the following questions. Include the reference for the article in the reference list, but do not repeatedly provide the reference within the text of your assignment. Instead, indicate before you answer questions 5-8 that all answers will be about the article (reference appropriately) and so you will not repeat the reference within the questions. You must, however, provide the section and associated page number (or numbers as appropriate) for every question that indicates they are required. For example, if writing something about the Abstract then you might note (Abstract, p. 2419). The section and page number(s) show that you know which part of an article to critique for a specific area, therefore they are very important. Direct quotes from the article may be appropriate, e.g., the purpose, and they are acceptable in this part of your assignment only.

Use ONLY the ratings of WEAK, FAIR, GOOD, or STRONG (or combination such as good-strong) in all questions where ratings are required. Please see the document called ‘Notes re identifying strengths-weaknesses’ on Moodle in the Course ‘Information re Assignment’ section.

PART B Article.

Holtslander, L., Kornder, N., Letourneau, L., Turner, H., & Paterson, B. (2012). Identifying the needs of parents and service providers of adolescents with Type 1 diabetes to aid in the creation of an online support intervention. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 21, 2419-2428. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2012.04182.x
5. Rate the title and provide 2 specific points of rationale for your rating. (1 mark – 0.25 mark for correct rating + supporting general statement; 0.25 mark for each correct specific point for rationale; 0.25 mark for correct section and page number).
6. What style of abstract was provided? Rate the abstract and provide 2 specific points of rationale for your rating. (1 mark – 0.25 mark for correct style; 0.25 mark for correct rating + supporting general statement; 0.25 mark for each correct specific point for rationale).
7. Was the phenomenon of interest clearly identified (yes/no)? Rate the clarity of the phenomenon of interest and provide 2 specific points of rationale for your rating. (1.25 mark – 0.25 mark for correct yes/no answer; 0.25 mark for correct rating + supporting general statement; 0.25 mark for each correct specific point for rationale; 0.25 mark for correct section and page number).
8. What was the purpose of this study? Rate the purpose and provide 3 specific points of rationale for your rating. (1.75 mark – 0.5 mark for correct purpose; 0.25 mark for correct rating + supporting general statement; 0.25 mark for each correct specific point for rationale; 0.25 mark for correct section and page number).

Critiquing Published Studies:

Consider each aspect of a published research study and critique for strengths and weaknesses. You can also use a combination of terms when you find that an aspect is not quite good enough for a rating, e.g., Good-Strong, or Weak-Fair. Provide rationale from the article to support your judgment of scientific merit. Note that it’s possible for one person to rate differently from another person – there is some objectivity but also some subjectivity in such ratings. The important point is that you have sufficient supporting evidence (from the article itself) for your judgment. I suggest you expand this table as you move through the course.

Strong Good Fair Weak

Qualitative or
Quantitative: QL/QT
Title
Abstract
Research Problem or Phenomenon of Interest: QL/QT
Purpose
Research Question
Hypothesis
This written assignment:

You will write in sentences/paragraphs as you answer each question. APA format, e.g., margins, font, and referencing, is expected, and a cover page is required. However, do not include headings – so there will be no Introduction or Conclusion sections either. Copy the questions below onto the page following the cover page and then provide your answer immediately beneath each question. Do not include the information about allocation of marks. To help you with format, please see the document called ‘Common APA Problem Areas for Use re Research F-15’ on Moodle under ‘APA’ in the ‘Getting Started’ section.

Required text.

LoBiondo-Wood, G., Haber, J., Cameron, C., & Singh, M. D. (Eds.). (2013). Nursing research in Canada: Methods, critical appraisal, and utilization (3rd ed.). Toronto, ON: Elsevier Canada.

A. Using your course text, please answer the following questions. You must provide the appropriate reference for each answer, i.e., the author(s), year, and page number(s). The full reference for each chapter you use must also be in the reference list. Do not use direct quotes from your text book. You need to put the answers into your own words to show that you understand, rather than that you can simply copy and paste.

1. Define each of research, evidence-based practice, and evidence-informed practice. Explain the main difference between the research and the evidence-informed practice processes. (2.5 marks – 0.5 mark each for correct definitions; 0.5 mark for correctly explaining; 0.5 mark for correct APA referencing in answer and in reference list).

2. Define each of non-directional, directional, and null hypotheses. Explain what non-directional and directional have in common that is different from null. (2.5 marks – 0.5 mark each for correct definitions; 0.5 for correctly explaining; 0.5 mark for correct APA referencing in answer and in reference list).

3. Describe 2 ways in which you as a newly graduated nurse will be expected to use your research-related competencies. (1.5 marks – 0.5 mark each for correct descriptions; 0.5 mark for correct APA referencing in answer and in reference list).

4. Define each of critical thinking and critical reading. Identify and describe 1 strategy that you plan to use for each of the 4 stages of the critical reading process. (3.5 marks – 0.5 mark each for correct definitions; 0.5 mark for each correct strategy; 0.5 mark for correct APA referencing in answer and in reference list).

B. Using the qualitative article indicated in the Course Outline, please answer the following questions. Include the reference for the article in the reference list, but do not repeatedly provide the reference within the text of your assignment. Instead, indicate before you answer questions 5-8 that all answers will be about the article (reference appropriately) and so you will not repeat the reference within the questions. You must, however, provide the section and associated page number (or numbers as appropriate) for every question that indicates they are required. For example, if writing something about the Abstract then you might note (Abstract, p. 2419). The section and page number(s) show that you know which part of an article to critique for a specific area, therefore they are very important. Direct quotes from the article may be appropriate, e.g., the purpose, and they are acceptable in this part of your assignment only.

Use ONLY the ratings of WEAK, FAIR, GOOD, or STRONG (or combination such as good-strong) in all questions where ratings are required. Please see the document called ‘Notes re identifying strengths-weaknesses’ on Moodle in the Course ‘Information re Assignment’ section.

PART B Article.

Holtslander, L., Kornder, N., Letourneau, L., Turner, H., & Paterson, B. (2012). Identifying the needs of parents and service providers of adolescents with Type 1 diabetes to aid in the creation of an online support intervention. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 21, 2419-2428. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2012.04182.x

5. Rate the title and provide 2 specific points of rationale for your rating. (1 mark – 0.25 mark for correct rating + supporting general statement; 0.25 mark for each correct specific point for rationale; 0.25 mark for correct section and page number).

6. What style of abstract was provided? Rate the abstract and provide 2 specific points of rationale for your rating. (1 mark – 0.25 mark for correct style; 0.25 mark for correct rating + supporting general statement; 0.25 mark for each correct specific point for rationale).

7. Was the phenomenon of interest clearly identified (yes/no)? Rate the clarity of the phenomenon of interest and provide 2 specific points of rationale for your rating. (1.25 mark – 0.25 mark for correct yes/no answer; 0.25 mark for correct rating + supporting general statement; 0.25 mark for each correct specific point for rationale; 0.25 mark for correct section and page number).

8. What was the purpose of this study? Rate the purpose and provide 3 specific points of rationale for your rating. (1.75 mark – 0.5 mark for correct purpose; 0.25 mark for correct rating + supporting general statement; 0.25 mark for each correct specific point for rationale; 0.25 mark for correct section and page number).

Critiquing Published Studies:

Consider each aspect of a published research study and critique for strengths and weaknesses. You can also use a combination of terms when you find that an aspect is not quite good enough for a rating, e.g., Good-Strong, or Weak-Fair. Provide rationale from the article to support your judgment of scientific merit. Note that it’s possible for one person to rate differently from another person – there is some objectivity but also some subjectivity in such ratings. The important point is that you have sufficient supporting evidence (from the article itself) for your judgment. I suggest you expand this table as you move through the course.

Strong Good Fair Weak

Qualitative or
Quantitative: QL/QT

Title

Abstract

Research Problem or Phenomenon of Interest: QL/QT

Purpose

Research Question

Hypothesis