Essay Instructions: Assignments Due June 9th
Read the Article and follow the questions from the Guidelines of Critiquing an Article.
Article information:
Authors-Connie Causey, MSN, RN & Beverly Greenwald, PHD, NP-C, CGRN
Gastroenterol Nurs. 2011 Jan-Feb;34(1):34-40. doi: 10.1097/SGA.0b013e31820b22c5.
Promoting community awareness of the need for colorectal cancer prevention and screening: a replication study.
Causey C1, Greenwald B.
Author information
Abstract
The American Cancer Society estimated that 152,260 people would be diagnosed with, and 50,630 people would die of, colorectal cancer in 2009. It recommends that screening for average-risk adults should start at the age of 50 years; however, less than half have been screened according to the guidelines. Colorectal cancer can be prevented by diet and lifestyle, in addition to polypectomy, and the morbidity and mortality can be reduced by early intervention. The purpose of this replication study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a health belief model-based colorectal cancer education session to increase awareness of the need for prevention and screening and to promote such discussions between the participants and their doctors. Participants attended education sessions at three agencies in the Midwest. Participants' beliefs, before and after the sessions, were evaluated by survey. The results support that the education sessions were successful in increasing awareness of the need for a healthy lifestyle and adhering to the screening guidelines. A longitudinal study would help to track awareness over time and evaluate the efficacy toward long-term healthy lifestyles.
Gastroenterol Nurs. 2011 Jan-Feb;34(1):34-40.
doi: 10.1097/SGA.0b013e31820b22c5.
Use Headings, such as Title, Abstract etc. Be certain to answer the questions, for example: Is the title a good one etc.
Use your text and Study, as a reference, no need to use other resources, but if you choose to that is fine.
Critiquing Quantitative Research
Basic Questions for Critiquing Title, Abstract, & Introduction in Quantitative Reports
TITLE
-Is the title a good one, succinctly suggesting key variables and the study
population
ABSTRACT
-Does the abstract clearly and concisely summarize the main features of the report (problem, methods, results, conclusions)?
-Does the review provide a state-of-the-art synthesis of evidence on the research problem?
-Does the literature review provide a solid basis for the new study?
INTRODUCTION
Statement of the Problem
-Is the problem stated unambiguously and is it easy to identify?
-Does the problem statement build a cogent and persuasive argument for the new study?
-Does the problem have significance for nursing?
-Is there a good match between the research problem and the paradigm and
methods used?
-Is a quantitative approach appropriate?
HYPOTHESIS OR RESEARCH QUESTION
-Are research questions and/or hypotheses explicitly stated? If not, is their absence justified?
-Are the questions and hypotheses appropriately worded, with clear specification of key variables and the study population?
-Are the questions/hypotheses consistent with the literature review and the
Conceptual framework?
LITERATURE REVIEW
-Is the literature review up to date and based mainly on primary sources?
-Does the review provide a state-of-the-art synthesis of evidence on the research
problem?
-Does the literature review provide a solid basis for the new study?
CONCEPTUAL/THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
-Are key concepts adequately defined conceptually?
-Is there a conceptual/theoretical framework, rationale, and/or map, and (if so) is it appropriate? If not, is the absence of one justified?
Basic questions for critiquing results and discussion in quantitative reports
RESULTS
Data analysis
-Were analyses undertaken to address each research question or test each hypothesis?
-Were appropriate statistical methods used, given the level of measurement of the variables, number of groups being compared, and so on?
-Was the most powerful analytic method used (e.g., did the analysis help to control for confounding variables?)?
-In intervention studies, were analyses performed using the intention-to-treat approach?
-Were Type I and Type ll errors avoided or minimized?
Findings
-Are the findings adequately summarized, with good use of tables and figures?
-Are findings reported in a manner that facilitates a meta-analysis and with sufficient information needed for evidence-based practice?
DISCUSSION
Interpretation of the findings
-Are all major findings interpreted and discussed within the context of prior research and/or the study's conceptual framework?
-Are the interpretations consistent with the results and with the study's limitations?
-Does the report address the issue of generalizability of the findings?
Implications and recommendations Do the researchers discuss the implications of the study for clinical practice or further research and are those implications reasonable and complete
Basic questions for critiquing methods in Quantitative reports
METHODS
Protection of participants rights
-Were appropriate procedures used to safeguard the rights of study participants?
-Was the study subject external review?
-Was the study designed to minimize risks and maximize benefits to participants?
RESEARCH DESIGN
-Was the most rigorous possible design used, given the purpose of the research?
-Were appropriate comparisons made to enhance interpret-ability of the findings?
-Was the number of data collection points appropriate?
-Did the design minimize biases and threats to the internal and external validity of the study (e.g., was blinding used, was attrition minimized?)
POPULATION AND SAMPLE
-Was the population identified and described?
-Was the sample described in sufficient detail?
-Was the best possible sampling design used to enhance the sample?s representativeness?
-Were sample biases minimized?
-Was the sample size adequate?
-Was a power analysis used to estimate sample size needs?
DATA COLLECTION AND MEASUREMENT
-Are the operational and conceptual definitions congruent?
-Were key variables operationalized using the best possible method (e.g., interviews,
observations, and so on) and with adequate justification?
-Are the specific instruments adequately described and were they good choices, given
the study purpose and study population?
-Does the report provide evidence that the data collection methods yielded data that were high on reliability and validity?
PROCEDURES
-If there was an intervention, is it adequately described and was it properly implemented?
-Did most participants allocated to the intervention group actually receive the intervention?
-Was data collected in a manner that minimized bias?
-Was the staff who collected data appropriately trained?
Basic questions for critiquing global issues in Quantitative Reports
GLOBAL ISSUES
Presentation
-Is the report well written, well organized, and sufficiently detailed for critical analysis?
-Was the report written in a manner that makes the findings accessible to practicing nurses
Researcher credibility
-Do the researchers ?clinical, substantive, or methodological qualifications and experience enhance confidence in the findings and their interpretation
Summary assessment
-Despite an identified limitations, do the study findings appear to be valid-do you have Confidence in the truth-value of the results?
-Does the study contribute any meaningful evidence that can be used in nursing practice or
that is useful to the nursing discipline
Reference-This is my text book as well
Polit, D.F., Beck, C. T., (2012). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice. (9th ed.). Wolters Kluwer Health, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
