Component three of the critique assignment. Note: First person (e. g., I, my, our) is not used. Your professor has written in the third person in these instructions. For scholarly work and publications, the author writes in the third person (e. g., this student, this RN, etc.). Your professor did not make this distinction when you wrote of your interests in an earlier assignment but wanted you be aware of this AMA requirement for future work. This document is provided in a word document so that you can download and use for your assignment.
Comments from your professor about this component are in red. Use a title page for every assignment in graduate school unless your professor advises you otherwise. The next pages are provided to assist you and to simplify the third component of your critique assignment. First, title page. Please provide a title of the assignment as follows.
Research critique assignment
Your name here, followed by your credentials for example, followed by course number, followed by date
Student Name (s) BSN, RN
NGR 5810 Section XX
Fall 20XX
Dr. Campbell & Dr. Diaz, DNP, CRNA, APRN
Graduate Faculty
Florida International University Nicole Wertheim College of Nursing and Health Sciences
Please read the pages from Polit and Beck (2021, pp. 102-109) and look up the boxes referred to in the right columns. The assignment and the critique tables are complex. Thus, your professor simplified this assignment for you which follows and was copied in part from your text (Polit & Beck, 2021 pp. 102-109). Only use one of the documents—either a quantitative or qualitative or quantitative checklist. So, your third component will be one critique in which you use the checklist. Summary: While you are expected to complete the checklist with a yes, no, unsure, or NA, comments are also encouraged guided by your text information.
Third component: One critique from a primary source.
Quantitative template (adapted from Polit & Beck, 2021, pp. 102-105) followed by a qualitative template (adapted from Polit & Beck, 2021, pp. 106-109). *For the third column, there are page numbers in the text that will refer you to additional “Boxes” within the text and page numbers for further explanations of the questions asked. Use these tables along with your text.
Cite the research article here using AMA format. Use Endnote make reference sheet of all studies included
Aspect Critiquing Questions *Student answers
of the report (yes/no/unsure/not applicable–NA)
and comments (not required but needed depending on your choice of the research).
Title Is the title a good one, succinctly suggesting key variables and the study population?
Comments
Abstract Did the abstract clearly and concisely summarize the main features of the report (problem, methods, results, conclusions)?
Comments
Introduction
Statement of the problem Was the problem stated unambiguously, and was it easy to identify?
Is the problem significant for nursing?
Did the problem statement build a persuasive argument for the new study?
Was there a good match between the research problem and the methods used—that is, was a quantitative approach appropriate?
Comments
Hypotheses or research questions Were research questions and/or hypotheses explicitly stated? If not, was their absence justified?
Were questions and hypotheses appropriately worded, with clear specification of key variables and the study population?
Were the questions/hypotheses consistent with existing knowledge?
Comments
Literature review Was the literature review up-to-date and based mainly on primary sources?
Did the review provide a state-of-the-art synthesis of evidence on the problem?
Did the literature review provide a strong basis for the new study?
Comments
Conceptual/
theoretical framework Were key concepts adequately defined conceptually?
Was a conceptual/theoretical framework articulated—and, if so, was it appropriate?
If not, is the absence of a framework justified?
Were the questions/hypotheses consistent with the framework?
Comments
Method
Protection of human rights Were appropriate procedures used to safeguard the rights of study participants?
Was the study externally reviewed by an IRB/ethics review board?
Was the study designed to minimize risks and maximize benefits to participants? ?
Comments
Research design Was the most rigorous design used, given the study purpose?
Were appropriate comparisons made to enhance interpretability of the findings?
Was the number of data collection points appropriate?
Did the design minimize biases and threats to the internal, construct, and external validity of the study (e.g., was blinding used, was attrition minimized)?
Comments
Population and sample Was the population identified?
Was the sample described in sufficient detail?
Was the best possible sampling design used to enhance the sample’s representativeness?
Were sampling biases minimized?
Was the sample size adequate?
Was the sample size based on a power analysis?
Comments
Data collection and measurement Were the operational and conceptual definitions congruent?
Were key variables measured using an appropriate method (e. g., interviews, observations, and so on)?
Were specific instruments adequately described and were they good choices, given the study population and the variables being studied?
Did the report provide evidence that the data collection methods yielded data that were reliable, valid, and responsive?
Comments
Procedures If there was an intervention, was it adequately described, and was it rigorously developed and implemented?
Did most participants allocated to the intervention group actually receive it?
Was there evidence of intervention fidelity?
Were data collected in a manner that minimized bias?
Were the staff who collected data appropriately trained?
Comments