Criteria for critiquing a research paper

How to Critique a Research Article

Introduction This should include: There may also be recommendations for further research. At other times the barrier is harder, or even impossible to cross.

Publication bias can occur when editors only accept manuscripts that have a bearing on the direction of their own research, or reject manuscripts with negative findings. It should not introduce any new material, but should address how the aims of the study have been met.

Materials and Methods Similar to a recipe, the description of materials and methods will allow others to replicate the study elsewhere if needed. Things to consider in this section are: Keywords Three to six keywords that encapsulate the main topics of the research will have been drawn from the body of the article.

There were any major omissions in the results, which could indicate bias Percentages have been used to disguise small sample sizes The data generated is consistent with the data collected Negative results are just as relevant as research that produces positive results but as mentioned previously Criteria for critiquing a research paper be omitted in publication due to editorial bias.

Unfortunately this is not always the case. References These should be relevant to the study, be up to date, and should provide a comprehensive list of citations within the text. Final Thoughts Undertaking a critique of a research article may seem challenging at first, but will help you to evaluate whether the article has relevance to your own practice and workplace.

What were the strengths and weaknesses of the study? Discussion This should show insight into the meaning and significance of the research findings.

You will need to evaluate whether the author has clearly interpreted the results of the study, or whether the results could be interpreted another way. Reading a single article can act as a springboard into researching the topic more widely and aids in ensuring your nursing practice remains current and is supported by existing literature.

It should both contain and justify the exact specifications of selection criteria, sample size, response rate and any statistics used. Graphs and tables should be clear and promote clarity of the text. What sort of sampling technique and size was used? What proportion of the eligible sample participated?

If a trial was undertaken, was it randomised, case controlled, blinded or double-blinded? Conclusions These should be clearly stated and will only be valid if the study was reliable, valid and used a representative sample size.

Critical evaluation is defined as a systematic way of considering the truthfulness of a piece of research, the results and how relevant and applicable they are.

Were there any obvious biases? The discussion should use previous research work and theoretical concepts as the context in which the new study can be interpreted. Surely the article will be of good quality if it has made it through the peer review process?

Communication difficulties arise even when a translator is available, and non-verbal messages may be missed by the patient or even by the health professional. This will demonstrate how the study is capable of achieving its aims. Were there threats to the reliability and validity of the study and were these controlled for?

Evidence of a literature review that is relevant and recent, critically appraising other works, not merely describing them Background information to the study, to orientate the reader to the problem Hypothesis or aims of the study Rationale for the study that justifies its need, i.

Any limitations of the study, including bias, should be clearly presented. Results Results should be statistically analysed and presented in a way that the average reader of the journal will understand.

Performing your own critical analysis of an article allows you to consider its value to you and to your workplace.Quantitative Article Critique: Factors Affecting the Successful Employment of Transition-Age Youths research was cited to show correlations between each variable and finding employment.

I noticed, however, that the authors cited research that studied youths with disabilities, secondary set certain criteria and selected the sample from. How to Critique a Research Article | Ausmed | Let's briefly examine some basic research and pointers on how to perform a literature review.

It should both contain and justify the exact specifications of selection criteria, sample size, response rate and any statistics used. This will demonstrate how the study is capable of achieving its.

Students research paper quiz fritz hansen essay table replicate comedy drama essay writing, an arguementative research paper iq and eq essay writing essay on women role in society criteria for evaluation bullying essay solution of social problems essay dual perspective essay.

Dismissing a point of view through an evaluation of its criteria Table 1). If the paper was not published in a peer-reviewed journal, consider the credibility of the Table 1: Elements of a Research Critique and Questions to Consider in Writing a Critique Elements of a research critique.

Step'by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 1: quantitative research Michaei Coughian, Patricia Cronin, Frances Ryan Are the indusion/exciusion criteria dearly identified?

Critiquing the research steps In critiquing the steps in the research process a number. * A research study or evaluation does not need to be complex. Strong studies possess methods that are appropriate to the question, support the answer with evidence, document the assumptions, procedures, and types of analysis and.

Criteria for critiquing a research paper
Rated 4/5 based on 73 review