Critiquing Research Paper

There is so much information out there specially with access through internet. It continues to multiply exponentially. Even this blog adds to the information out there. I did put up a blog yesterday about how to searchfor information. This blog is going a bit further to when you start looking up research papers. There is plenty of research carried out and often you even find opposing conclusions for same questions in different studies. There is a need to be even more discerning than when you are looking up random information. I have left out references from this blog as this is my personal checklist on share here.

Title

•What does the title convey?

•Is the title concise and easy to understand?

•Does it include the key words of your search?

Abstract

•Does the abstract contain a précis of the research question?

•The methods used and tools of data gathering?

•The findings in brief?

•Does it provide information that allows you to evaluate whether the article is meets your needs.

Introduction

•Does the introduction give a clear understanding of the topic?

•Summarises the paper?

•Signposts what is in the paper?

•Is there reference to methodology?

•Indicates the findings of the research?

•Who were the authors?

•What are there job titles and qualifications?

•Are the authors recognised experts in their field?

The research question

•How clearly is the research question or the research problem stated?

•How clearly is the background to the question/problem described..

·        From the authors own experience

·        From the context of others’ experience - review of the literature.

·        What gaps in knowledge are there?

·        How broad is the literature search?

·        Is it up to date and relevant?

·        Are the studies critiqued by the researcher?

·        Is a summary of current knowledge provided?

•Is the importance of the question/problem to nursing or health care or the relevant subject explained?

•What contribution is this study expected to make to the knowledge base of the subject?

•What contribution is this study expected to make to the practice of the subject?

•How does it relate to other research studies in the same area?

•What terms and concepts need defining?

•Are these clear, and is the terminology consistent throughout the study?

•By the end of the introduction, are you clear on what is being studied and why?

Method of research

•Consider:-    

-       What research design was used - experimental, survey, ethnography, phenomenology, case study, action research etc.

-       Was this appropriate for the question being researched?

•Where was the study (an institution, a hospital, person’s home etc) conducted?

•Does the research describe in detail, the selection of participants?

•What are the criteria for accepting someone on the sample? What criteria are included in the exclusion of people?

•How were participants approached, informed and recruited?

•How is the sample size justified?

•Was sample mortality discussed in health related research?

Data Collection

•How were the data collected-observation, interview, questionnaire etc?

•What data collection tools were used and how appropriate are they?

•How valid and reliable are they?

•Have the tools been piloted?

Data Analysis

•How exactly were the data analysed?

•Was this appropriate method of analysis?

•Were appropriate tools for analysis used?

•If qualitative analysis, was the author’s analysis checked?

•If quantitative how were the statistics handled?

•Does the analysis provide answers for the research questions asked?

What were the ethical issues?

•Were they acknowledged?

•How were they addressed in order to protect the comfort, convenience and rights of the respondents?

•Was the study approved by a Research Ethics Committee?

•Were vulnerable participants used?

•Were the participants informed about the research project?

•Were participants apprised of the risks, both obvious and subtle, of participating in the research?

•Were they deceived in any way?

•Was written consent obtained from the research participants?

•Did participants have the right to self-determination?

•Were they coerced in any way?

•Were they given the right to withdraw from the study if they wished to?

•Was anonymity and confidentiality maintained?

•Did the benefits resulting from the study outweigh the risks?

•Were human participants put at undue risk?

Results/Findings

•How clearly are these presented?

•Do tables and text agree?

•Are actual numbers given and not just percentages?

•Are statistical tests named and significance levels given?

•In qualitative research are excerpts from transcripts quoted to illustrate the identification of themes and sub-themes?

•Going back to the original question/problem, was the aim of the study achieved?

Discussion

•Is it clear how the results/findings of this study add to the body of knowledge?

•Is the importance of this study made explicit?

•What are the implications for the subject and its practice?

•What gaps in knowledge still exist?

•Are further questions/problems identified?

• Are there suggestions on how these could be tackled?

•Does the author discuss the strengths and weaknesses of this study?

•What are its limitations?

•Are possible sources of bias/error acknowledged?

References

•Are references comprehensive and complete?

Finally

•Was the research worthwhile?

•How clearly has it been presented?

•Do you accept the results/findings of the report?

•If you do, but with reservations, what are they?

•If you do accept it, will it influence your practice?

•If ‘yes’ how, if ‘no’ why?