Quantitative Research Critique

Quantitative Research Critique Quantitative Research Critique Based on this article “Barriers to treatment:describing them from a different perspective” by Francesca Devine, Taylor Edwards and Steven R Feldman. Complete the Quantitative Research Critique template attached below on just this sections: Abstract (5 questions) Background/Literature review (10 questions) Purpose,Research questions, Hypothesis (10 questions) Please be concise. quantitative_research_critique.docx ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED AND ORIGINAL ESSAY PAPERS South University School of Nursing and Health Sciences NURS Research Theory Guidelines for Quantitative Research Critique Name of student:_____ Section/Points Abstract (5) Questions 1. Does the abstract tell you enough about the article to determine the variables, design of study, population being studied? Response 2. Does the abstract tell you enough about the article to determine if you wish to read it? 3. Does it indicate the purpose of the study? 4. Does it highlight the methodology used? 5. Are the major findings included? ** Remember that most journals limit the length of the abstract Background/Lit Review (10) 1. Does the background and significance section logically support the need for the study? 2. Are the references current? 1 Section/Points Questions Response 3. Are references from primary sources? 4. Are the articles related directly to the research problem? 5. Is the literature critically analyzed for gaps in knowledge and limitations of studies? 6. Does the article include research that supports and does not support the study (presents both sides of an issue)? 7. Does the literature review seem sufficiently thorough? 8. Is there a summary of current knowledge? 9. Does the literature support establish a rationale for this study? 10. Overall, summarize the strength of evidence 2 Section/Points Theoretical Framework (4) Questions presented in the literature review. 1. Is an explicit theoretical or conceptual framework described? Response 1. No explicit theoretical or conceptual framework is described. 2. N/A 2. Is there a logical link between the theory and the research problem? 3. Do the aims/research questions/hypotheses flow from the theory? 3. N/a 4. Imogene King Conceptual System-Theory of Goal Attainment would fit because it’s about nurses communicating appropriately 4. If there is no explicit theoretic framework, identify a theory that you think would be appropriate or identify the concepts that an appropriate theory would address. Purpose, Research Questions, Hypothesis (10) information to clients so that mutual goal setting and goal attainment can occur. 1. What is the purpose of the study (as stated in the article)? 2. Are research questions or hypotheses stated? If so: What are they? If not, what are they? 3. Does the research question flow logically from the purpose of the study? 4. If hypotheses are stated, are they null or directional? 5. If there are no hypotheses stated, can you infer an appropriate hypothesis? 3 Section/Points Questions 6. What are the dependent, independent and confounding variables in this study? Response 7. What is the target population? 8. Is there an operational definition of the variables? Design (5) 1. What is the design of this study? (e.g., identify the study as experimental, quasi-experimental, or non-experimental (survey or relationship designs). If non-experimental, what type? 1. Non-experimental. Quantitative Research Critique They systematically searched for systematic review papers published between Jan 01, 2010 and Dec 06, 2017. Searches were limited to reviews having adherence to medications prescribed in the outpatient setting as the main topic. 2. Not a combined design. 3. There was no actual experiment done. They found 1805 articles and excluded some bases on different criteria. Their final count was 31 2. Is there a combined design? (e.g. descriptive longitudinal) systematic reviews describing barriers to medication adherence. 3. If there is more than one group in the study, were baseline group comparisons made (did the investigator compare the treatment and control subjects at baseline)? If yes, are there any significant differences in the groups at baseline? 4. The length of the study was not long because their research was 4. Was the length of the study adequate to answer the research question? 5. The researchers found over a thousand articles and excluded some based on papers from the past but, they obtain article from January 01, 2010 to December 06, 2017. based on their criteria. They had a large amount of articles to work 4 Section/Points Questions 5. Are any of the following threats to internal validity (alternative explanations for the findings in the study) present? Response with. They obtained the articles over an eight year period. Maybe they could have done a 10 year period. History: There doesn’t seem to be any historical events between • • • • • • • • • • • History: unrelated events occurring at the same time as the study Subject maturation: changes in the subjects during the study period Testing: effects of repeated measurements or the test itself on the dependent variable Instrumentation: changes in the measurement instruments or evaluators between data collection points Statistical regression: extreme measurement scores in one group that become less extreme Selection bias: baseline differences in the treatment/control groups Mortality: selective loss of subjects from treatment/control groups or the study Diffusion or imitation of the treatment: evidence of contract between groups Compensatory equalization with treatment of control subjects: evidence that control subjects received some of the treatment Resentful demoralization of control subjects: evidence that control subjects performed less well that they normally would Characteristics of the person collecting the data: evidence to suggest that characteristics of data collectors could have influenced the outcomes 01/2010-12/2017. Subject Maturation: There were no changes in the subject, being that they were article that met certain criteria. Testing: The testing was conducted by exclusion criteria created by the research group. Instrumentation: There was no instrumentation used. Statistical Regression: N/A Selection Bias: Authors deny any bias. Mortality: N/A mortality was not discussed. Diffusion or imitation of the treatment: Find more articles with different disease process. Compensatory equalization with treatment of control subjects: N/a there were no control subjects due to getting their information from prior studies. Resentful demoralization of control subjects: No control subjects 5 Section/Points Questions Response were used. Characteristics of the person collecting the data: Data was extracted from articles by the authors. Sample (12) 1. How were subjects recruited? 1. Articles were obtained by searching on PubMed database. 2. Inclusion criteria was searching systematic reviews, written in the 2. Quantitative Research Critique What were the inclusion and exclusion criteria? English language, a publication date between January 01, 2010 and 3. What sampling method was used? December 06, 2017, and having barriers to adherence as the 4. What is the sample size? Are response and attrition rates discussed? subject. They also searched barriers to medication adherence, barriers to medication compliance, barriers to patient adherence, 5. Are you concerned about the adequacy of the sample size? Why or why not? and barriers to patient compliance. Exclusion criteria is nonsystematic review, non-English language, Published prior to January 6. Is there evidence that the investigator(s) did a power analysis in order to avoid a Type II error? 01, 2010, non-human species as subject of study. 3. Samples were taken from PubMed database. 7. Was the sample representative of the target population? 8. How were subjects assigned to treatment groups (randomization)? 4. They started off with 1,805 articles and after exclusion criteria was applied they ended up with 31 systematic review articles. 5. I am not concern about the size. 9. Is the sample culturally diverse? 6 Section/Points Questions 10. Are there threats to external validity (generalizability)? What are they? If there are potential threats, are they acknowledged? Response 6. There is no evidence that a power analysis was done. 7. There was no target population. 8. N/A there were no treatment groups. 11. Is there mention of the protection of the rights of subjects? (IRB approval?) 9. The sample was not culturally diverse but, there were 6 articles that looked into cultural beliefs. 12. Does any of the above affect the credibility of the study’s findings? 10. There are no threat to external validity. 11. There is no mention since actual subject were not used. 12. No. A systematic searched was conducted and articles were used based on the researchers’ criteria. Methods (8) 1. Is there an intervention? If so, what is it? 2. Is there a clearly described protocol for the intervention (independent variable)? 3. Is there a clearly described protocol for data collection (dependent variable)? 4. Are the measures (instruments, physiologic measures, observations, interviews) clearly described? 5. Are the measures appropriate? Are the measures direct or indirect? 6. Is instrument reliability addressed (reliability coefficients or inter-rater reliability)? If yes, was there evidence that the instrument was tested in a 7 Section/Points Questions population similar to that being used in the study? Response 7. Is instrument validity addressed? 8. Do you think there are measurement issues that threaten the validity of the study? Are they acknowledged by the investigators? Results/Findings (8) 1. What statistical tests were used to analyze the data? List each reported test and why it was used (2 pts). 2. Is there evidence that the assumptions of the statistical tests were met? 3. Is each question or hypothesis addressed during analysis? 4. What were the findings in relation to each purpose (research question or hypothesis)? Give actual numbers, p values, and/or confidence intervals. 5. Are tables and figures used to summarize findings? Are they clear? 8 Section/Points Questions 6. Is the analysis interpreted correctly? Response 7. Was statistical significance found? If not, is the sample size an issue (i.e., too small to provide adequate statistical power – Type II Error)? Discussion (8) 1. Are findings discussed in relation to each purpose, question or hypothesis? 2. Are the findings discussed in relation to the theoretical framework? 3. Are statistically significant and non-significant findings explained? 4. Is the issue of clinical significance addressed? 5. Are findings related to literature reviewed (other studies)? 6. Did limitations to the study include those threats to internal validity that you identified in the Design section, #5)? 7. Are the conclusions consistent with the study 9 Section/Points Questions Response results? 8. What are the recommendations for further research? Implications for Practice (5) Would you utilize these findings in your practice (assume that they are potentially applicable)? Why or why not? I would in order to see how I could better assist my patients in staying complaints with their care. I like how this article takes into account what a provider can do to improve compliance. 10 … Purchase answer to see full attachment Student has agreed that all tutoring, explanations, and answers provided by the tutor will be used to help in the learning process and in accordance with Studypool’s honor code & terms of service . Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100 Use the following coupon code : NURSING10