e-learningsite.com

free essays
Free essays

Evidence of Nursing Practice

EVIDENCE OF NURSING PRACTICE 7

NSG 3041 Evidence for Nursing Practice

Assignment #3

Appraising a Quantitative Research Study

Scoring

Eachsection of a research study is rated according to the following:

Scoreof 1 (StronglyDisagree). A score of1 should be given when there is no information that is relevant tothe item or if the concept is very poorly reported.

Scoreof 7 (Strongly Agree).A score of 7 should be given if the quality of reporting isexceptional and easily understood.

Scores between 2 and 6. A score between 2 and 6 is assigned when thereporting of the item does not address the item fully. A score isassigned depending on the completeness and quality of reporting.Scores increase as more criteria are met and considerationsaddressed.

1. The author’s credentials suggest that the author is an expert inthe area of the research.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree

Score=6. The authors seem to have extensive knowledge on the field ofoncology.

2. The title of the article accurately reflects the article’scontent.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree

3. The problem being investigated is clearly stated and is relevantto nursing and health.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree

4. The literature review is well organized, addresses all studyvariables and highlights strengths and weaknesses of previous studiesin the field.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree

The literature review does not fully address previous studies in thefield of treating cancer symptoms. However, the authors have pointedout that the area of study is new and it is attracting new research.

5. The conceptual/theoretical framework is clearly identified,developed, and applicable to the research.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree

I disagree that the authors have a conceptual and or a theoreticalframework for the study.

6. The research questions or hypotheses are clearly stated.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree

I strongly disagree since there no research questions or hypothesisthat is stated in the research.

7. Each of the variables is operationally defined.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree

Whereas the variables are mentioned, it is clear that the authors didnot clearly defined them.

8. The research design is appropriate for the variables to bestudied and the purpose of the research.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree

9. The method of selecting the sample is appropriate (with inclusionand exclusion criteria stated), and the sample has sufficient power.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree

The patients who were required for the test were well selected sinceall had extreme or recurrent cases of cancer.

10. The researcher thoroughly addresses ethical considerations.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree

11. The method for gathering data is clearly described and could bereplicated.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree

12. If measurement instruments or scales are used, reliability andvalidity are clearly addressed?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree

13. The results section clearly describes how the collected datawere analyzed. The method of data analysis is correct for themeasurement level of the variables (e.g., categorical, continuous)and the goal of the study.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree

The results are clear for the study. However, the analysis methodused has not been pointed out.

14. Significant findings are clearly described in text withsupporting statistics and summarized, if appropriate, in tables orfigures.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree

15. The researcher links findings to existing research or theory andmakes appropriate recommendations for further research.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree

Summary of strengths and weaknesses of the research

The research seeks to identify the feasibility of apatient-controlled cognitive-behavioral intervention for managingpain, fatigue, and sleep disturbance in cancer patients. It isevident that the research has selected the correct sample of patientsto carry out the research (Kwekkeboom et al, 2010). It is alsoclear that the research has followed a proper procedure to arrive atthe results. The research went a step further to train theparticipants in order to ensure the accuracy of the results. It isapparent to note that the two week period that the research tookplace, adds to the authenticity of the results arrived at during thequantitative research. The research also provides a noteworthy pointthat there needs to be extensive future research on feasibility ofpatient-controlled cognitive-behavioral intervention for managingpain, fatigue and sleep disturbance in cancer patients (Kwekkeboom etal, 2010). The research’s strong points are clear and it alsoapparent that the researchers have viewed previous research on thetopic.

It is, however, critical to note that the authors failed to includea theoretical and/or a conceptual framework for the purpose of thestudy. In addition, the research fails to include a hypothesis orresearch questions to be answered by the research. It is alsoapparent that the data used to arrive at conclusions is solely basedon the honesty and accuracy of the subjects. The subjects used in theresearch recorded the effects of the patient-controlledcognitive-behavioral intervention (Kwekkeboom et al, 2010).

References

Kwekkeboom, K. Anderson, K. &amp Wanta, B. (2010). Feasibility ofa Patient-Controlled Cognitive-Behavioral Intervention for Pain,Fatigue, and Sleep Disturbance in Cancer. National Center forBiotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine.