Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies Assignment

Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies Instructions:

Critiquing the validity and robustness of research featured in journal articles provides a critical foundation for engaging in evidence-based practice. In Weeks 5 and 6, you explored quantitative research designs. In Week 7, you will examine qualitative and mixed methods research designs. For this Assignment, which is due by Day 7 of Week 7, you critique a quantitative and either a qualitative or a mixed methods research study and compare the types of information obtained in each.

To prepare for Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies:

Select a health topic of interest to you that is relevant to your current area of practice. The topic may be your Course Portfolio Project or a different topic of your choice.
Using the Walden Library, locate two articles in scholarly journals that deal with your portfolio topic: 1) Select one article that utilizes a quantitative research design and 2) select a second article that utilizes either a qualitative OR a mixed methods design. These need to be single studies not systematic or integrative reviews (including meta-analysis and metasynthesis). You may use research articles from your reference list. If you cannot find these two types of research on your portfolio topic, you may choose another topic.
Locate the following documents in this week’s Learning Resources to access the appropriate templates, which will guide your critique of each article:

• Critique Template for a Qualitative Study
• Critique Template for a Quantitative Study
• Critique Template for a Mixed-Methods Study

Consider the fields in the templates as you review the information in each article. Begin to draft a paper in which you analyze the two research approaches as indicated below. Reflect on the overall value of both quantitative and qualitative research. If someone were to say to you, “Qualitative research is not real science,” how would you respond?

To complete this Assignment on Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies:

Complete the two critiques using the appropriate templates.
Write a 2- to 3-page paper that addresses the following:
Contrast the types of information that you gained from examining the two different research approaches in the articles that you selected.
Describe the general advantages and disadvantages of the two research approaches featured in the articles. Use examples from the articles for support.
Formulate a response to the claim that qualitative research is not real science. Highlight the general insights that both quantitative and qualitative studies can provide to researchers. Support your response with references to the Learning Resources and other credible sources.
As you complete this Assignment, remember to:
Submit your paper to Grammarly and SafeAssign through the Walden Writing Center. Based on the Grammarly and SafeAssign reports, revise your paper as necessary.
Reminder: The School of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. The School of Nursing Sample Paper provided at the Walden Writing Center provides an example of those required elements (available from the Walden University website found in this week’s Learning Resources). All papers submitted must use this formatting.
Combine all three parts of this assignment into one Word document including both critique templates and the narrative with your references. Submit this combined document.

A framework for critiquing quantitative research articles

Aspect		Questions	Comments
Topic	1.	What topic is the concern of this article?
	2.	Can you identify measurable ‘variables’ in the title or researcher’s statement concerning their main interest?
	3.	Is this an important topic for research?
Introduction and review of literatures	1.	How does the researcher argue that the topic is worthwhile?
	2.	How widespread or big a problem is it?
	3.	Is the seriousness of the topic reinforced by the previous studies?
	4.	Is there a thorough review of the literature outlining current knowledge on this topic?
	5.	Are the key variables defined and an attempt made to consider how they can be measured? E.g. definitions of ‘pain’ or ‘anxiety’ and descriptions of scales frequently used to measure them.
Aim	1.	What is the statement of the aim of the data collection? This usually begins with the word ‘to’, e.g. ‘The aim of this study is ‘to examine/determine/ establish/compare/etc’. If it is a randomised control trial there may be a hypothesis.
Methodology or Broad approach	1.	Within a quantitative approach, is it a survey, experimental (RCT), or correlation study?
	2.	Does seem suitable given the aim of the study?

Tool of data collection	1.	What was the method used to collect the data?
	2.	Had this been used in previous studies and so may be regarded as reliable or accurate?
	3.	If not, was it piloted? Is there any mention of reliability or validity?
	4.	Is there a rationale given for the choice of tool?
	5.	Could an alternative tool have been considered?
Method of data analysis and presentation	1.	Is the method of processing and analyzing the results described in the methods section, such as statistical process through SPSS computer analysis, and are the results clearly presented in the results/findings section?
	2.	Does the researcher clearly explain any statistical techniques or methods of presentation such as tables, graphs, pie charts?
Sample	1.	On how many people, events, or things are the results based?
	2.	If questionnaires were used, what was the response rate? If it was a randomised control trial, what was the dropout rate? Is either of these likely to have an impact on the results?
	3.	Were there inclusion and exclusion criteria stated? Were these reasonable given the research question and the nature of the sample? Do they limit to whom the results may apply? What method was used to select who were included in the study (the sampling strategy)?
	4.	Does the sample suffer from any kind of bias?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ethical considerations	1.	Did an ethical committee review and approved the study?
	2.	Was informed consent gained and mention made of confidentiality?
	3.	Could the study be said to be ethically rigorous?
Main Findings	1.	What did they find in answer to their aim, research question and hypothesis?
		What were the main results that relate to the aim of the study?
Conclusion and Recommendations	1.	Did they give a clear answer to their aim? If they stated a hypothesis, did they say if this was supported or rejected?
		Were clear recommendations made (who should do what, how, now)?
Overall strengths and limitations	1.	What would you say were the aspects of the study they did well? What aspects were less successful?
		Did they acknowledge any limitations to the study?
Application to practice	1.	How do the results relate to practice?
	2.	Should any changes be considered?