Reference no: EM132492086

Assignment - Qualitative Study Article Questions

Article - Oncology nurses' communication challenges with patients and families: A qualitative study by Smita C. Banerjee, Ruth Manna, Nessa Coyle, Megan Johnson Shen, Cassandra Pehrson, Talia Zaider, Stacey Hammonds, Carol A. Krueger, Patricia A. Parker, and Carma L. Bylund.

Critique - Identification of report elements. Evaluate objectively, then explain how these elements from the chosen study meet (or do not meet) the expected definition and purpose of each element

1. Descriptive Vividness

2. Documentation of Participants

3. Methodological Congruence

4. Ethical Standards

5. Auditability

6. Analytical and Interpretive Preciseness

7. Philosophical / Theoretical Connectedness

8. Heuristic Relevance

A. Intuitive Recognition

B. Relationship to existing Body of Knowledge

C. Threats to Nursing

1. Practice

2. Research

3. Education

Use the following grid to guide your reading and analysis of the article:

STANDARDS/EVALUATION CRITERIA

Descriptive Vividness

1. Was the significance of the study adequately described?

2. Was the purpose of the study clearly described?

3. Were the interpretations presented in a descriptive way that illuminated more than the quotes did?

Documentation of Participants

1. Were the study participants described in detail?

2. Was the selection of participants reasonable? Was a rationale provided for participant selection?

3. Were the context and location of the study described with sufficient detail to determine if the findings are applicable to other settings?

Methodological Congruence

1. Were the assumptions underlying the study articulated? Were the assumptions and data collection procedures congruent?

2. Was adequate trust established with the participants? Was there an open dialog and conversational approach to data collection?

3. Were research questions articulated? Did the researcher ask questions that explore participants' experiences, beliefs, values, or perceptions?

4. Was the data collection process adequately described?

5. Did the researcher spend sufficient time with participants gathering data? Did the researcher conduct multiple interviews?

6. Was the approach of multiple data collectors similar?

7. Was the method of selecting and gaining access to the study participants reasonable?

8. Was the role of the researcher during the interview process described? Were qualitative credentials and expertise of the researcher(s) described?

Ethical Standards

1. Were the participants informed of their rights?

2. Was informed consent obtained?

3. Were participants' rights protected?

Auditability

1. Was the decision trail used in arriving at conclusions described in adequate detail? Can the findings be linked with the data?

2. Were enough participant quotes included to support the findings?

3. Were the data sufficiently rich to support the conclusions? Did the participants describe specific examples of the phenomenon being investigated?

Analytical and Interpretative Preciseness

1. Do the categories, themes, or findings present a whole picture? Did the findings yield a meaningful picture of the phenomenon under study?

2. Were the findings returned to participants or experts in the area?

3. Did two or more researchers participate in data analysis? How were disagreements about data analysis handled?

Philosophical/Theoretical Connectedness

1. Was a clear connection made between the data and nursing practice?

2. Did the researcher identify the philosophical or theoretical basis for the study? Were citations provided for the philosophical or theoretical approach used?

3. Was the philosophical or theoretical basis of the study consistent with the study assumptions, data collection process, and analysis and interpretative methods used? Were citations provided for the philosophical or theoretical approach used?

Heuristic Relevance:

Intuitive Recognition

1. Can the reader recognize the phenomenon described in the study?

2. Are the findings consistent with common meanings or experiences?

Relationship to Existing Body of Knowledge

1. Did the researcher adequately examine the existing body of knowledge?

2. Did the researcher compare and contrast the findings with those of other studies?

3. Did the researcher describe lacunae in current understandings that would account for unique findings?

Threats to Nursing a) Practice, b) Research, or c) Education

1. Are the findings relevant to nursing practice, research, or education?

2. Did the reader learn more than had been previously reported in the literature?

3. Do the findings have implications for related cases?

4. Are suggestions for further study identified?

Format -

A. Title page that includes name, topic, course title, date, instructor.

B. Structure

1. Neatly typewritten

2. Spelling and grammar

3. Logical topic development

C. Length (2 page[s] not counting title page)

D. D.APA general formatting rules and citations throughout paper.