These are the instruction
Critical Evaluation of a Research Paper
The purpose of this assignment is to demonstrate your ability to evaluate one quantitative or qualitative nursing research article of interest from any refereed nursing journal. Writing a critical review of a journal article can help to improve your writing and analytical skills. By assessing the work of others, you develop skills as a critical reader and become familiar with the types of evaluation criteria necessary to translate the evidence to practice.
Instructions:
Choose one primary research (1) article used in the literature review—less than five years or if you prefer in the EBP project. It is preferable to use a randomized controlled trial or the highest level of evidence. Attach a copy of the article.
Write a 1-2 page critique on the article (excluding cover and reference page).
Format references and citations using 7th ed. APA guidelines.
Read the Johns Hopkins nursing evidence-based practice: model and guidelines and use Appendix E critically Download Appendix E critically appraise from the article.
Begin your critique by identifying the:
article’s title
author(s)
date of publication
name of the journal or other publication in which it appeared
and when was the article published
In your introduction, you should briefly describe the purpose and nature of the study and, if applicable, its theoretical framework. If the paper was not published in a peer-reviewed journal, consider the credibility of the publication in which it appeared.
If you are reviewing a research study, organize the body of your critique according to the paper’s structure.
Did the researcher identify the gaps in the knowledge?
Did the researcher identify the purpose of the study?
Write a brief description and analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the research design and methodology. For example:
How does the method reflect other studies of the same topic? (sample, data collection, setting).
What makes this method feasible? (quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods).
How realistic is it? How does the method address questions of validity? (independent, dependent variables).
How does the researcher overcome the limitations of the method?
Are there large limitations or minor ones?
How will these limitations affect your ability to use this data to answer your research question?
Describe the results by answering:
How were the results interpreted?
How were they related to the original problem (author’s view of evidence rather than objective findings)?
Look at DISCUSSION are the author(s) able to answer the question (test the hypothesis) raised?
Did the research provide new factual information, a new understanding of a phenomenon in the field, a new research technique?
How was the significance of the work described?
Did the reported observations/interpretations support or refute observations or interpretations made by other researchers?
Did the researcher report limitations.
Describe the significance of the research by answering:
Did the research make a significant contribution to human knowledge?
Did the research produce any practical applications?
What are the nursing implications of this research?
How do you evaluate the significance of the research?
Papers will be graded by rubric. Please take time to review the rubric so that you are aware of the expectations for the research critique paper.
Rubric
Formal Paper – Critical Evaluation
Formal Paper – Critical Evaluation
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Quality and Copy of the article
10 pts
Outstanding
The journal’s primary research article is current, peer-reviewed, contains the author’s name(s), year of publication, and corresponds to the list of references.
5 pts
Acceptable
The journal’s research article is current, but there is no information about the article’s worthyness.
2.5 pts
Unacceptable
It is an article but is not primary research or peer reviewed.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Study Summary
Included purpose, nature of the study, and theoretical framework if any.
10 pts
Outstanding
The summary clearly outlines the main research question, methods, results, and implications in the student’s own words.
5 pts
Acceptable
Most of the article is summarized, but the student may not clearly cover all aspects (i.e., the main research question, methods, results, and implications).
2.5 pts
Unacceptable
The student does not clearly summarize the main points of the article (i.e., the main research question, methods, results, and implications) and/or includes inaccurate information.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Identify the Gap of Knowledge
10 pts
Outstanding
Identifies the rationale for the study’s aim/ purpose by clearly identifying a gap in the literature.
5 pts
Acceptable
A rationale is identified. However, does not give the rationale for the gap in the literature.
2.5 pts
Unacceptable
A clear rationale for the study aim/ purpose (the gap in the literature)isn’t identified.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Study methods
10 pts
Outstanding
The study design is described in detail. If quantitative data were collected, psychometric properties of instruments are provided (e.g. validity and reliability) are provided. The sampling strategy(inclusion/ exclusion criteria), study setting, and data collection procedures are described in detail. The approach used for data analyses is described.
5 pts
Acceptable
Study methods are generally described but information regarding nuances of how the study was conducted is more limited.
2.5 pts
Unacceptable
Critical details necessary to understand how the study was conducted are lacking. Sections such as study design, procedures, measures/ instruments, analytic approach are missing.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeResults/findings
10 pts
Outstanding
Results/products/outcomes are described in detail and alignwith description ofstudy methods. Analyses ofdata are sophisticated and precise
5 pts
Acceptable
Resultsare adequatelydescribed and aligned with description ofstudy methods.Analyses of data are completed correctly.
2.5 pts
Unacceptable
Resultsare poorlydescribed and/ordo not align with description ofstudy methods. The Results section includes “conclusions” instead of simply presenting the data and/ or analyses.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscussion
10 pts
Outstanding
Applies relevant thinking skills and shows that understand the meaning of the results of the study Identifies and clearly discusses multiple implications and consequences of the findings and compares the findings to other evidence.
5 pts
Acceptable
Applies relevant thinking skills (e.g. comparing, classifying). However, shows superficially understanding of the implications of the results. Does not compare with other research results.
2.5 pts
Unacceptable
Applies relevant thinking skills However, does not compare or cite any implications of the results.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConclusion and Recomendations
10 pts
Outstanding
Stated recommendations are based on a thorough examination of evidence, a clear explanation of reasonable alternatives, and an evaluation of possible consequences. Conclusions and recommendations are congruent with the strength of evidence reviewed, and an appropriate interpretation of both clinical and statistical significance of the findings.
5 pts
Acceptable
Conclusions and recommendations are stated and discussed. Implications and consequences of the conclusion are reflected in context, relative to assumptions, and supporting evidence.
2.5 pts
Unacceptable
Conclusions are drawn and recommendations are provided, but without discussion of implications or consequences.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLimitations and implications
10 pts
Outstanding
Limitations of the study are clearly stated and are linked to implicationsfor future studies.
5 pts
Acceptable
Limitations of the study are adequately stated but the implications of the limitation for future studies/work are not addressed.
2.5 pts
Unacceptable
Limitations ofthe study are missing or described in a cursory fashion.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOverall analysis of the study
10 pts
Outstanding
The student provides an insightful analysis of the article, answering all or nearly all of the questions assigned. The student articulates novel ideas that clearly go beyond what is in the article itself. The analysis is clear and rational.
5 pts
Acceptable
The student provides an analysis of the article by answering most of the questions assigned. The ideas presented are mostly novel, going beyond what is in the article itself.
2.5 pts
Unacceptable
The student does not clearly move beyond a summary of the article to provide an analysis. No new ideas are contributed beyond what is in the article itself, or the analysis is overly confusing.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA 7th ed.
10 pts
Outstanding
All needed citations were included in the report. References matched the citations, and all were encoded in APA format.
5 pts
Acceptable
Citations within the body of the report and a corresponding reference list were presented. Some formatting problems exist, or components were missing
2.5 pts
Unacceptable
Citations for statements included in the report were not present, or references that were included were not found in the text.
10 pts