Qualitative Scholarly Paper Critique Due (20 points)
Criteria:
- Identify an area of clinical interest
- Find a minimum of two peer-reviewed journal article (no older than 5 years) related to your clinical topic of interest. Do not use a meta-analysis or systematic review.
- Critique the journal article, fully answering the following questions
- This critique should be 3-4 pages (not including the cover page and reference page)
- Utilize the APA levels of headings on page 62 of the APA Manual. Utilize level one headings.
- APA formatting required. (Include appropriate APA level/headings)
| Introduction/Ethical Aspects of a Study/Purpose Statement | Were adequate steps taken to safeguard participant’s privacy?
How was confidentiality maintained? Were vulnerable groups involved in research? If yes, were special precautions instituted because of their vulnerable status? |
| Research Tradition Design | Was the research tradition for the study identified?
If none was identified, can one be inferred? Are the data sources, research methods and analytic approach congruent with the research tradition? Was there evidence of reflexivity in the design? |
| Sampling | What type of sampling strategy was used?
Are sampling procedures clearly delineated in the study? |
| Data Collection | Given the research question and characteristics of study participants, did the researcher use the best method of capturing study phenomena (self-reports, observation)?
If self-report methods were used, did the researcher make good decisions about the specific interview method? method used to solicit information (focus group interviews, critical incident interviews)? Were interviews tape recorded and transcribed? What methods of data collection were utilized? (Self-reports, Scales, Observation, Rating Scales)? If self-report methods were used, did the researchers make good decisions about specific methods (in-person interviews, mailed questionnaires, etc.)?
|
| Data Analysis Approach | Identify the type of analyses undertaken to address each research question or test each hypothesis.
Were appropriate methods used? How did the researchers explain the phenomenon through the data? statistical methods used, given the level of measurement of the variables, number of groups being compared, and so on? |
| Results/Findings | Were the findings effectively summarized, with good use of experts?
Do the themes adequately capture the meaning of the data? Does it appear that the researcher satisfactorily conceptualized the themes or patterns in the data? Did the analysis yield an insightful, provocative, and meaningful picture of the phenomenon under investigation? |
| Clinical Practice/Conclusion | Did the researchers discuss the study’s implications for clinical practice or future research and if so, were the implications grounded in the study evidence, and in evidence from earlier research? |
