Read the following article:
Yang, H., Lee, H., Chu, T., Su, Y., Ho, L., & Fan, J. (2012). The comparison of two recovery room warming methods for hypothermia patients who had undergone spinal surgery. Journal of Nursing
Scholarship, 44(1), 2-10
(If unable to locate this article, please let me know and I will upload it!)
Write a 3-5 page paper not including title page or References page.
Use the descriptions in each category found in the table below to guide your critique.
1.Does the abstract tell you enough about the article to determine the variables, design of study, population being studied?
2.Does the abstract tell you enough about the article to determine if you wish to read it?
3.Does it indicate the purpose of the study?
4.Does it highlight the methodology used?
5.Are the major findings included?
** Remember that most journals limit the length of the abstract
6.Are the references recent?
7.Are they from primary sources?
8.Are the articles cited related directly to the research problem?
9.Is the literature critically analyzed for gaps in knowledge and limitations of studies?
10.Does the article include research that supports and does not support the study (presents both sides of an issue)?
11.Does the literature review seem sufficiently thorough?
12.Is there a summary of current knowledge?
13.Does the article establish a rationale for this study?
14.What is the level of evidence of each study discussed?
15.Given the above, summarize your evaluation of the literature review.
Theoretical framework purpose, research questions, hypotheses:
1.Is an explicit theoretical or conceptual framework described?
2.is there a logical link between the theory and the research problem?
3.Do the aims/research questions/hypotheses flow from the theory?
4.Were the research findings interpreted within the context of the theory?
5.If there is no explicit theoretic framework, identify a theory that you think would be appropriate or identify the concepts that an appropriate theory would address.
6.What is the purpose of the study (as stated in the article)?
7.Are research questions or hypotheses stated? If so: What are they?
8.Does the research question flow logically from the purpose of the study? , state an example research question based on the stated purpose of the study.
9.If hypotheses are stated, are they null or directional?
10.If there are no hypotheses stated, can you infer an appropriate hypothesis?
11.What are the dependent and independent variables in this study?
12.What is the target population?
13.Diagram the variables (independent and dependent and extraneous, mediating or moderating variables that you or the author identify)
14.Is there an operational definition of the variables?
1.What design is utilized in this study? (At a minimum, identify the study as experimental, quasi-experimental, descriptive correlational (ex post facto) or descriptive).
2.Is the design prospective, retrospective, cross-sectional, or longitudinal?
3.Does it make sense given the research purpose/questions?
4.If there is more than one group in the study, were baseline group comparisons made (i.e., did the investigator compare the treatment and control subjects at baseline)?
5.If yes, are there any significant differences in the groups at baseline?
6.How many times are data collected?
7.Is the number of data collection points appropriate, given the purpose or research questions?
8.Are potentially confounding (extraneous) variables identified? If yes, are they controlled for? How? If no, are there any that you think should have been?
9.Are any of the following threats to internal validity (alternative explanations for the findings in the study) present?
•History: unrelated events occurring at the same time as the study
•Subject maturation: changes in the subjects during the study period
•Testing: effects of repeated measurements or the test itself on the dependent variable
•Instrumentation: changes in the measurement instruments or evaluators between data collection points
•Statistical regression: extreme measurement scores in one group that become less extreme
•Selection bias: baseline differences in the treatment/control groups
•Mortality: selective loss of subjects from treatment/control groups or the study
•Diffusion or imitation of the treatment: evidence of contract between groups
•Compensatory equalization with treatment of control subjects: evidence that control subjects received some of the treatment
•Resentful demoralization of control subjects: evidence that control subjects performed less well that they normally would
•Characteristics of the person collecting the data: evidence to suggest that characteristics of data collectors could have influenced the outcomes
10.Are the threats you identified acknowledged as limitations of the study?
1.Is the type of sample identified?
2.Is a study setting identified?
3.How were subjects recruited?
4.What were the inclusion and exclusion criteria?
5.Was it a random or convenience sample?
6.How representative is the sample of the target population?
7.How were subjects assigned to treatment groups (randomization)?
8.Is the sample culturally diverse?
9.How representative is the setting of the target setting?
10.Are there threats to external validity (generalizability)? What are they? If there potential threats, are they acknowledged?
11.What is the sample size? Are response rate and attrition discussed?
12.Is there evidence that the investigator(s) did a power analysis in order to avoid a Type II error?
13.Are you concerned about the adequacy of the sample size? Why or why not?
14.Is there mention of the protection of the rights of subjects? (IRB approval?)
15.Does any of the above affect the credibility of the study’s findings?
1.Is there an intervention? If so, what is it?
2.Is there a clearly described protocol for the intervention (independent variable)?
3.Is there a clearly described protocol for data collection (dependent variable)?
4.Are the measures (instruments, physiologic measures, observations, interviews) clearly described?
5.Are the measures appropriate? Are the measures direct or indirect?
6.Is instrument reliability addressed (reliability coefficients or inter-rater reliability)? If yes, was there evidence that the instrument was tested in a population similar to that being used in the study?
7.Is there reliability data from the current study?
8.Is instrument validity addressed?
9.Do you think there are measurement issues that threaten the validity of the study? Are they acknowledged by the investigators?
1.What statistical tests were done and for what purpose were they used? List each reported test and why it was used (6pts).
2.Were they appropriate for the type of data collected?
3.Is there evidence that the assumptions of the statistical tests were met?
4.Is each purpose, question or hypothesis addressed during analysis?
5.What were the findings in relation to each purpose (research question or hypothesis)? Give actual numbers, p values, and/or confidence intervals.
6.Are tables and figures used to summarize findings? Are they clear?
7.Is the analysis interpreted correctly?
8.Was statistical significance found? If not, is the sample size an issue (i.e., too small to provide adequate statistical power, i.e., Type II Error)?
1.Are findings discussed in relation to each purpose, question or hypothesis?
2.Are the findings discussed in relation to the theoretical framework?
3.Are statistically significant and nonsignificant findings explained?
4.Is the issue of clinical significance addressed?
5.Are findings related to literature reviewed (other studies)?
6.Are important limitations acknowledged? Were there threats to validity in the design, sample, methods (Type 1 Error)?
7.Are the conclusions consistent with the study results?
8.What are the recommendations for further research?
Summarize briefly your critique of this article. Would you utilize these findings in your practice (assume that they are potentially applicable)? Why or why not??
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.Read more
Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.Read more
Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.Read more
Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.Read more
By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.Read more