Mynursingprofessionalportfolio.weebly.com



Quantitative and Qualitative Research Article Critique MatrixMaggie Siler RN, CCRN, RCISNURS 350 – Ferris State UniversityQuantitative Research EvaluationQualitative Research EvaluationArticle: Massey, R. (2010). A randomized trial of rocking-chair motion on the effect of postoperative ileus duration in patients with cancer recovering from abdominal surgery. Applied Nursing Research, 23(2), 59-64. doi:10.1016/j.apnr.2008.06.001Article: Aadal, L., & Kirkevold, M. (2011). A model for neurorehabilitation after severe traumatic brain injury: facilitating patient participation and learning. Advances In Nursing Science, 34(1), E1-e17. Introduction: Is the purpose of the study presented? YESIs the significance of the problem discussed? YESDoes the investigator provide a sense of what he or she is doing and why? YESStatement of the phenomenon of interest:Is the phenomenon of interest clearly identified? YESHas the researcher identified why the phenomenon requires a qualitative format? YES, the study is based on a humanistic approach to rehabilitation, which considers daily life experiences on learning.Has the researcher described the philosophic underpinnings of the research? YESProblem Statement: Is the problem statement clear? YES Does the investigator identify key research questions and variables to be examined? YES Does the study have the potential to solve a problem that is currently faced in clinical practice? YES Purpose:Has the researcher made explicit the purpose of conducting the research? YESDoes the researcher describe the projected significance of the work to nursing? YES, the main significance to nursing practice is briefly examined under the heading of discussion.Literature Review:Does the literature review follow a logical sequence leading to a critical review of supporting and conflicting work? YES, both supporting and conflicting evidence are presented. The author segues nicely into how this study will contribute to nursing knowledge.Is the relationship of the study to previous research clear? YESDoes the investigator describe gaps in the literature and support the necessity of the present study? YESTheoretical framework and hypothesis:Is a rational stated for the theoretical/conceptual framework? YESDoes the investigator clearly state the theoretical basis for the hypothesis formulation? YESIs the hypothesis stated precisely and in a form that permits it to be tested? YES Methodology:Are the relevant variables and concepts clearly and operationally defined? YESIs the design appropriate for the research questions or hypotheses? YESAre the methods of data collection sufficiently described? YESWhat are the identified and potential threats to internal and external validity that were present in the study? Small sample size, differences in diagnosis and surgical procedures, anesthesia times, and pain medications/administration routes.If there was more than one data collector, was inter-rater reliability adequate? N/A – all data were collected by the principle investigator.Method:Is the method used to collect data compatible with the purpose of the research? YESIs the method adequate to address the phenomenon of interest? NOIf a particular approach is used to guide the inquiry, does the researcher complete the study according to the processes described? YES Sample:Are the subjects and sampling methods described? YESIs the sample of sufficient size for the study given the number of variables and design? YES, through software analysis it was determined that 54 participants were necessary to provide statistically significant results. Is there adequate assurance that the rights of human subjects were protected? YES, this study was approved by the institutional review board and informed consent was obtained from patients 21 years and older who had intact cognition, spoke English, and were able to tolerate proposed interventions. There is no evidence of coercion to participate. Sampling:Does the researcher describe the selection of participants? NOIs purposive sampling used? YES, purposive sampling is used when the number of subjects is limited. According to the article there are only 120 traumatic brain injuries in Denmark annually that require specialized neurorehabilitation services. Are the informants who were chosen appropriate to inform the research? UNCERTAIN, patient, spouse, and parents were chosen. It is not made clear the relationship between those parties (close, distant, warm, or hostile).Instruments:Are appropriate instruments for data collection used? YES. Each characteristic measured had an impact on outcomes.Are reliability and validity of the measurement instruments adequate? YES. Previous research validates and supports the use of these instruments.Data Collection:Is data collection focused on human experience? YESDoes the researcher describe data collection strategies (i.e. interview, observation, field notes)? YESHas the researcher made explicit the procedures for collecting data? YES, field notes and transcribed interviews were utilized. Data analysis: Are the statistical tests used identified, and values reported? YESAre appropriate statistics used, according the level of measurement, sample size, sampling method, and hypotheses/research questions? YES, the sample size was validated as statistically significant, and all data were appropriately statistically summarized. T tests and nonparametric Mann-Whitney testing correlated results.Data analysis:Does the researcher describe the strategies used to analyze the data? YESHas the researcher remained true to the data? YESDoes the reader understand the procedures used to analyze the data? NODoes the researcher address the credibility, auditability, and fittingness of the data? Credibility: Do the participants recognize the experience as their own? YES Auditability: Can the reader follow the researchers thinking? YES Does the researcher document the research process? YES Fittingness: Can the findings be applicable outside the study situation? YES Are the results meaningful to individuals not involved in the research? YESIs the strategy used for analysis compatible with the purpose of the study? YES Results:Are the results for each hypothesis clearly and objectively presented? YES, both in tables, as well as the body of the report.Do figures and tables illuminate the presentation of results? YES, the tables provide a good overview of study population and findings.Are results described in light of the theoretical framework and supporting literature? YES Findings:Are the findings presented within a context? YESIs the reader able to grasp the essence of the experience from the report of the findings? YESAre the researcher’s conceptualizations true to the data? YESDoes the researcher place the report in the context of what already is known about the phenomenon? YESConclusions/discussion:Are conclusions based on the results and related to the hypotheses? YESAre study limitations defined? YES Are generalizations made within the scope of the findings? YES Are implications of the findings discussed? YESAre recommendations for further research stated? YESConclusion, implications, and recommendations:Do the conclusions, implications, and recommendations give the reader a context in which to use the findings? YES, however careful observation and collaboration should form the basis of care for the various presentations of TBI patients. One cannot be rehabilitated unless they participate.Do the conclusions reflect the study findings? YES Does the researcher offer recommendations for future study? YESHas the researcher made explicit the significance of the study to nursing? YES, however nursing implications seemed limited to the discussion. Research utilization implications:Is the study of sufficient quality to meet the criterion of scientific merit? YESDoes the study meet the criterion of replicability? YES Is the study of relevance to practice? YES, postoperative ileus has been a long standing issue during recovery from abdominal surgery. Is the study feasible for nurses’ to implement? YESDo the benefits of the study outweigh the risks? YES, rocking is definitely a benign intervention.References:Aadal, L., & Kirkevold, M. (2011, January-March). A model for neurorehabilitation after severe traumatic brain injury: facilitating patient participation and learning. Advances in Nursing Science, 34 (1)(E1 - E17), E1 - E17. doi:, R. L. (2010, May). A randomized trial of rocking-chair motion on the effect of postoperative ileus duration in patients with cancer recovering from abdominal surgery. Applied Nursing Research, 23(2), 59-64. doi:, R. M. (2012). Foundations of nursing research (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download