Assignment title“Critically appraise (critique) the published qualitative research article provided. This is by Maranon and Pera (2015) and concerns professional identity in nursing students.” Your appraisal should determine whether a suitable research methodology, that allows the achievement of the research objective described in the article, has been chosen and well applied in the article. You should provide a critical justification as to whether or not this methodology was appropriate. The appraisal should also assess whether the objective of the research have been met successfully. It is important to indicate that UH referencing guidelines should be used throughout the appraisal.”
Learning outcomes:1. Critically evaluate different research paradigms and the application of a range of methodologies in order to plan, design, conduct and present healthcare research.
2. Critically and systematically appraise a broad range of evidence within their specialist field.
3. Critically discuss the ethical and governance issues surrounding healthcare research and research processes.
Guidance
1. Focus on the research methodology and methods of the journal article, including the article’s analysis of findings. We want to assess your understanding of research methods and analysis. You do not have the word count available (1,650 words is the max) to evaluate all sections of the article. Thus you are NOT expected to evaluate the title, abstract, introduction or literature review/background. You may comment briefly on the article’s discussion/conclusions if that is relevant to the authors’ appreciation/analysis of their own methodology and methods. You should briefly discuss any ethical issues associated with the research. 2. Do NOT simply describe the article. This will certainly result in a fail. 3. A critical evaluation requires you to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the methodology and methods used by the authors. Using your knowledge of qualitative research methods, consider whether the methodology and methods used by the authors seem appropriate and well implemented. Are they likely to answer the research question and meet the aims? Are there any strengths or flaws? Does the research have “rigour”? Would alternative methods have worked better in your view? Are the approaches used by the authors clear and well justified? Or is there vagueness and uncertainty? Vagueness in published research can be a sign that the authors aren’t sure about something or are “skating over” possible weaknesses and omissions. Consider published quality criteria for qualitative research (you will find some useful resources in the module site). Are there signs of possible “bias”, either in the authors’ selection of a human sample or in their analysis and discussion of findings? Have the authors been “reflexive?” Are they aware of possible pitfalls? Are there discrepancies? Is the research of value and relevant to clinical practice? Do not be afraid to praise aspects of the research if this seems warranted.4. You can choose to use a recognised critique framework in order to structure your appraisal if you wish but need to bear in mind that you may need to adapt this to suit the research article being appraised. There are several published critique frameworks available for qualitative research, including one by CASP (The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme). These all list possible questions that can be asked when critiquing an article. You can use a published framework if you wish, or adopt the frameworks as you want. You can even ask original questions of your own. In any event, only ask questions that are relevant to the article being critiqued. For example – issues of sample size and “power” are not relevant to a qualitative article. 5. Make sure that you have read textbooks on qualitative research methods (or textbooks that include qualitative research methods) and that you use knowledge gained from this to evaluate the article. Include the books in your referencing. Make use of qualitative research methods terminology. 6. It may be useful to find a couple of other published qualitative research articles that are in the research topic area of the article being evaluated. They could make a good comparison and will make you more aware of alternative approaches to the research. Include them in your referencing. 7. Do not write your critique in the first person. Do not say “I think that..” or “it appears to me that…”. It is the convention to critique in the third person. For example – “The authors’ use of focus groups seems surprising…” or “triangulation was not applied within the study…”8. Once you have mentioned the details of the critique article at the start (authors, title, date) you don’t have to reference it throughout. You can just mention “the article” or “the authors” rather than using the Harvard system for it everywhere. 9. Don’t refer to yourself as “the author”. That will get confused with the author(s) of the article you are critiquing. 10. Remember that real world research always faces practical problems. Maybe the authors have done their best in difficult circumstances. 11. A good piece of research doesn’t have to have conclusive findings. It might pose more questions. 12. Be critical but fair. Don’t be too accepting of everything in the article. Just because the authors have reputations and PhDs etc does NOT guarantee that a research article is top quality. 13. There are almost always weaknesses in health services research, or things that could have been done better. Be wary if the authors do not seem to be aware of any weaknesses in their own research.
15 references must be used