1. Quantitative article
Sekerci & Bicer (2019). The effect of walking exercise on quality of life and sleep of elderly individuals: Randomised control study.
2. Qualitative article
Kim (2018). Nurses’ experiences of care for patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome - coronavirus in South Korea.
Both articles can be accessed through Discovery database.
Task 2: Research Critique
Students will demonstrate their ability to critically analyse literature to support research development. To examine the process of critical analysis (critique) of research literature, read the TWO research articles provided and undertake a critical analysis (critique) of each study. The research articles to be used for this task relate to healthcare and infection risk management and will be provided on Moodle.
1. In a 350-word summary:
• Define research critique and discuss why this is an important area of research inquiry;
• Briefly summarise the key areas of the quantitative and qualitative research studies provided. Your summary should clearly describe the aim, research design, methodology and method as well as the key findings reported in each research article. Identify the levels of evidence of each study.
2. Use the framework provided to undertake a critique of the TWO research articles provided.
• Use scholarly research literature to provide appropriate justification for your critique comments for each one of the areas included in the framework;
• Complete the critique using a blank template, as shown in Appendix I, page 27. Please type your critique directly into the Word copy of the template which can be downloaded from Moodle. All sections of the template are to be completed.
• Use a separate copy of the template for each article you critique. Please add the reference for each article you are critiquing where it is indicated at the top of each template.
Submissions must be uploaded to the Moodle Dropbox before the specified due date.
Learning outcomes: 1. Analyse commonly used research methodologies and evaluate their application to contemporary research inquiry in professional practice. 2. Evaluate the quality of published research and debate aspects of design and methodology that influence the effectiveness of research activity. 3. Use information retrieval to examine and evaluate evidence-based research and its application within this professional sector
Word limit: 2000 words Submission date: 19.8.2020, 11.55 pm
The comments outline points you should consider in a critique of each section of a research study.
General credibility of research process and conclusions
Does the research process clearly investigate the research aim or hypotheses stated in the study? Do the findings produce a credible understanding of the research aim or hypotheses? Is the study conducted and reported in such a way that demonstrates a robust process has been undertaken to support credible findings? Introduction Does the introduction explain the purpose of the study and outline the problem that the researcher is investigating? Does the introduction establish the importance of this study indicated e.g. the significance of the problem being investigated and how the study contributes towards advancing knowledge in a field of inquiry? Is the research aim able to be identified and clearly stated? Background/ literature review Is there a thorough review and logical development of the literature outlining current knowledge and understanding of the topic? Is the review directly related to the research problem? Does the review just summarise research publications or is there an integrated review that includes an objective analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the studies included? Does the researcher highlight gaps in current knowledge and understanding? Research design, methodology and method Is there an adequate description of the research design? Is the selected design the most appropriate to answer the research question, investigate and research aim or hypotheses? Do the researchers use theory to justify and support the selection of their research design? Is there an adequate description of the research methods to permit replication of the study? Is the design the most appropriate to investigate the research aim or hypotheses? Is the sampling process adequately described, outlining the number and recruitment of participants? In quantitative research is a sufficient sample recruited (power analysis described where this is appropriate) to ensure validity of findings and are inclusion/exclusion criteria justified? If questionnaires are used, are these adequately described e.g. detailed description of their application, their relevance to the study and validity of the instrument documented? In qualitative research, is the sampling strategy consistent with saturation? Ethical considerations Was ethical approval of the study described? Was any risk to participants considered and steps taken to minimise risks described? If vulnerable groups are involved, was attention given to specific needs of the group? Was informed consent gained, confidentiality and privacy assured and withdrawal from the study addressed? Discussion Is there an adequate examination of the findings and their contribution to the development of knowledge? Do the researchers find an answer to their research aim/hypothesis? Does it point out the strengths and weaknesses of the study and how these may be addressed in future research? Do the authors compare their findings with those of other researchers, discuss how their study extends current knowledge and provide rationale for any variations? Limitations Do the researchers say how the findings can be generalised to other people and do they state any limitations associated with generalisation of their findings? Are the stated limitations complete or can others be identified? Adapted from: Holland & Rees (2010) and Richardson-Trench, Taylor, Kermode & Roberts (2014)