Reference no: EM132455787

BHS107A Research & Evidence-Based Practice Assessment - Complete Critical Analysis and Evaluation of Journal Article

Learning Outcomes -

a) Understand and use the basic language of research and evaluation including qualitative and quantitative research, case studies, ethnography, systemic reviews, surveys, sampling and questionnaires.

b) Critically discuss approaches to gathering and evaluating data.

c) Explain the rationale and purpose of scientific research, evaluation and the evidence based approach in the context of health care.

d) Critically analyse contemporary evidence based health sciences publications, identify methodological errors when present and suggest ways for correction.

e) Integrate contemporary evidence from a set of related publications and describe how this evidence can be used for advancing theory and practice.

Context and Instructions -

Topic: Students are required to conduct a complete analysis and evaluation of one of the two journal articles.

Students are required to critically appraise the selected article according to the following headings in an essay format. Please note that the sections within the sub-headings are guidelines only and are not intended to be answered in a question answer format.

1. INTRODUCTION

The paper should be introduced with appropriate referencing and a discussion on the reason why you chose the article should be included.

For Example: In this paper the article entitled "The therapeutic use of Drug X" by Smith et al., 2012 will be critically appraised. This article investigates.....

2. EVALUATION OF THE INTRODUCTION SECTION

2.1 Literature review, consider: whether the authors' literature search was adequate in terms of number, quality and relevance of references

2.2 Aims or hypotheses (3 marks), consider:

The question asked.

Whether the question was clearly stated.

Whether the question was focused in terms of the population, intervention and outcome.

3. EVALUATION OF THE METHODS SECTION

3.1 Subjects, consider:

The participants

Whether the participants were representative of the population under study

How the participants were selected for inclusion in the study

Whether the sample was adequately described

Whether the sample size was appropriate and an adequate representative of the target population

Whether the sampling mode was appropriate

Whether bias was evident in the selection of the participants

Whether participant consent was obtained.

3.2 Apparatus/instrumentation, consider:

The type of instrumentation used

Whether the validity and reliability of the instrumentation was established.

3.3 Control group/s, consider:

Whether there was a control group

Whether the use/nonuse of a control group was consistent with the study strategy employed

Whether the control was a placebo or alternative/normal treatment

Whether there the control "treatment" was adequately described

If there was no inclusion of control group, analyze the reasons

Whether there were ethical issues in using a control group.

3.4 Subject assignment, consider:

The methods regarding participants allocation to the treatment groups

Whether the allocation was random

Whether the method of allocation was adequately described

Whether there were any differences between the groups at entry to the study reported

Whether any differences reported might explain any outcome/s (confounding).

3.5 Treatment parameters, consider:

Whether all treatments given were adequately described

Whether the settings were adequately described

Whether qualifications and/or training of administering personnel indicated.

3.6 Rosenthal & Hawthorn effects?, consider:

The effects

Whether the authors addressed these effects and explain how if it has been addressed

4. EVALUATION OF THE RESULTS SECTION

4.1 Tables and graphs, consider:

Whether tables were clearly identified

Whether table headings were adequately described and any abbreviations clearly noted

Whether the axis of graphs were clearly identified

Whether correlation was used, if so, discuss the data and/or correlation graph presented.

4.2 Selection of statistics, consider:

Whether any assumptions were made about the population distribution, i.e. normal/non-normal

Whether statistics was used, if so, discuss the category, i.e. descriptive/inferential

Whether statistics used is consistent with population distribution

Whether an effect size was discussed

Whether "numbers needed to treat" calculation has been performed

Whether confidence interval was quoted, if so, explain its significance.

4.3 Interpretation of the findings, consider:

The outcomes of the study

Whether the findings of the author(s) were supported by the results

Whether the author(s) have made any inappropriate generalizations

Whether clinical significance was discussed

Whether the clinical significance would outweigh any statistical significance.

5. CONCLUSION

5.1 Internal validity

Overall appraisal of the internal validity the study. (Consider in the context of the criteria for internal validity)

5.2 External validity

Overall appraisal of the external validity of the study. (Consider in the context of the criteria for external validity)

5.3 Overall Quality

Briefly discuss the overall quality of the article with reference to its strengths and weaknesses as outlined in the above sections.

6. REFERENCES & Academic writing - Refer to Think Academic and Referencing Guidelines. APA style of referencing is required.