Prof.Anoopa.K.

R
Introduction
Meaning:
The term derives from a greek term “Kritik” meaning “
discerning judgement”, usually the value of something.
Caution
 All published studies are not sound
 All information on net are not reliable
Purpose
 Student do critique to demonstrate their
methodological skill.
 To accept the study for publication in journal
 To assemble evidence for practice
What is critique?
 It is a thoughtful critical appraisal of strength and
limitations of the study
 It critically identifies adequacies and inadequacies,
virtues as well as faults
 Identifies both merits and limitations
 Provides guidance about alternative research strategies
 Offers guidance about ways in which study results may
have been compromised
 Research critique is a mechanism to provide feedback
for improvement
What critique is not?
 Not just reviews or summary of a study
 Not to hunt for or expose mistakes
Types of Research Critiques
conducted
 Student critiques
in Nursing
 Critiques by practice nurse
 Critiques by Nursing Educators
 Critiques by Nurse Researchers
 Critiques after verbal presentation of studies
 Critiques after published research reports
 Critiques for abstract selection
 Critiques of an article for publication
 Critique of research proposals
Elements of Critique
 Substantive and theoretical dimension
 Methodologic dimension
 Ethical Dimension
 Interpretative dimension
 Presentation and stylistic dimension
Substantive and theoretical
dimension

 Problem statement, hypothesis and research

questions, literature review and conceptual framework
Methodologic dimension
 Research designs, data collection procedures, data
quality, data analysis
Ethical Dimension
 Ethical principles followed, measures taken to protect
rights of participants.
Interpretative dimension

 Interpretations arrived correctly,recommendations

made
Presentation and stylistic
dimension

 Presentation of chapters,diagram,tables,figures,Style
of referencing etc
Substantive and theoretical
dimension

A. Evaluate the need for conducting study

1. Avoid myopic view of study’s importance and
relevance
2. Avoid unnecessary replication
3. Replication can be done with specific purpose for
generalization of earlier findings
B. Good fit between research problem and overall study
design.
Guidelines for critiquing problem
statement
 Is the problem statement clear?( Purpose)
 Is problem statement in single declarative or
interrogatory sentence?
 Are the study variables and population stated?
 Does the problem statement indicate that empirical
data could be gathered on the topic of interest?
Critiquing Hypothesis and Research
Questions
 Does the study contain a hypothesis?
 Is each hypothesis clearly worded and concise
 Is hypothesis written in declarative statement?
 Is each hypothesis directly tied to study problem?
 Is there a clearly identified study framework,is hypothesis
derived from this framework
Critiquing Hypothesis and Research
Questions
 Does each hypothesis contain population and at least
two variables?
 Is it apparent that each hypothesis is empirically
tested?
 Does each hypothesis contain only one prediction
 Is the study contains research questions,are questions
precise and specific?
Critiquing Literature review
 Does it include all major studies conducted on the
topic?
 Recent Studies?
 Is the review mere summary or critically appraise and
compare key studies
 Does it identify gaps in literature
 Does review use appropriate language,is it objective
 Well organized?,Development of ideas clear?
 Does it lay strong foundation for the new study?
Critiquing Theoretical and
conceptual Framework
 Does it describes a theoretical and conceptual
framework of the study?
 Does it describe major features of theory?
 Is theory appropriate to research problem
 Whether based on conceptual model,or borrowed
from other discipline,concepts adequately defined,
does researcher tie the findings of study back to
framework at end of report
Critiquing Theoretical and
conceptual Framework
 Are all the concepts adequately definedin a way that is
consistant with theory
 Does the researcher tie the findings back to the
framework at the end of the report?
METHODOLOGIC DIMENSIONS
In Quantitative study
Design-What?
Sample-Who?, Size?
Data Collection Method-What?
Data Analysis- Statistics used?
METHODOLOGIC DIMENSIONS
In Qualitative study
Design-What?
Setting-Where
Sample-Who?, Size?
Data Source/ Collection Method-What?
Data Analysis- Statistics used?
Quality enhancement- look for evidences that the
researcher has undertaken to enhance credibility and
dependability of data
Guideline for critiquing research
design in Quantitative studies
 What could the best research design for the study?
 Is there an intervention?
 Was the intervention described with sufficient details?
 Longitudinal Or Cross sectional design? Was it
appropriate?
 What procedures were used to control external
factors?
Guideline for critiquing research
design in Quantitative studies
 To what extent study is internally/Externally valid?
 Major Limitations?
 Could the design have been strengthened by inclusion
of qualitative component?
Guidelines for critiquing
Qualitative and Mixed method
designs
 Is the research question congruent with research
tradition?
 How well design described?
Guidelines for critiquing
Qualitative sampling designs
 Is the accessible population identified and described?
 What type of sampling plans used?
 Probability or Non probability sampling used?
 Does the method suggest potential bias?
 Are the size and key characteristics of sample
described
Guidelines for critiquing
Qualitative sampling designs
 Is the sample sufficiently large?
 Is the setting and study group adequately described?
 Sample selection procedures adequately described?
Guidelines for critiquing Data
Collection Procedures
 How the data was collected?
 Who collected the data?
 Was the training of data collectors adequate?
 Where and under what circumstances data collected?
 Were other people present during data collection?
 Did the data collection place any burdens-Time,
stress.privacy issues. How this might have affected
data quality?
Guidelines for critiquing Self
reports
 Does the research question and self report match?
 How structured was the approach
 Did the resarcher use the best possible mode for
collecting self report(personal interviews,telephone
interviews,seld administered questionnaires)
 Was the instrument too long Or too Brief?
 Tools adequately pretested?
Guidelines for critiquing Self
reports
 If a scale is used,is it justified?
 If a new scale developed for the study,was it adequately
tested and refined?
Guidelines for critiquing
observational methods
 Does the research question lead itself to an
observational method?
 Is the degree of structure of observational method
consistent with research questions?
 What was the unit of analysis of observations?
 Where did observation take place?
 How were data recorded?
 What steps taken to minimize observer bias?
Guidelines for critiquing
Biophysiologic Measures
 Does the research question appropriate for collection
of biophysiologic data?
 Was the proper instrumentation used?
 What care was taken to obtain accurate data?
 Does the researcher have skills for proper use and
interpretation of data?
Guidelines for critiquing Data
Quality
 Is operational definition(Scoring procedures)
specified?
 Do they clearly indicate rules of measurement?
 Does the report offer evidence of the reliability of
measures?
 Validity?
 Were the research hypotheses supported?
Guidelines for critiquing Data
Quality
 Does there appear to be strong relationship between
variables as conceptualized
Guidelines for critiquing
Quantitative Analysis
 Does the report include any descriptive statistics?
 Was the correct statistics used
 Any inferential statistics used?
 Was the selected statistical test appropriate, given the
level of measurement of variables?
 Were tables and figures were judiciously used to
summarize large masses of statistical information?
Guidelines for critiquing
Qualitative Analysis
 Given the nature of data,were they best analyzed
qualitatively?
 Is the initial categorization scheme described?
 What evidence does the report provide that the
researcher analysis is accurate and replicable?
 Was the context of phenomenon adequately
described?
Ethical Dimension
 Look for any violation of human rights
 Weigh between ethical violation with specific merits
of study?
 Were the subjects exposed to any physical harm?
 Did the benefits outweigh the risks?
 Were vulnerable subjects used?
 Did participants had an opporunity to decline
participation
 Whether participants told about potential risk?
Ethical Dimension
 Steps taken to safeguard privacy?
 Whether study approved by institutional review board
Interpretative Dimensions
 Identify study limitation
 Whether interpretations based on objective data?
 Study implications directly emerged from study
findings.
 Whether all major findings discussed?
 Are interpretations consistant with results?
 Implications
 Does the researcher offer implication of finding in
nursing?
 Is the implications appropriate?
Interpretative Dimensions
 Recommendations
 Are specific recommendations made- methodological
changes suggested,any future investigations needed?
 Recommendations for specific nursing actions
 Recommendations consistent with findings and
existing body of knowledge?
 Presentation and Stylistic
Dimension
 Report should be:
 Well organized
 Have sufficient information
 Be clear
 Have no grammar mistakes
 Be concise
 Avoid jargon
Guidelines for critiquing
presentation of research report
 Does the report give sufficient amount of information to
permit a thorough critique of the study?
 Well written and edited
 Report well organized or confusing?
 Report sufficiently concise or lot of details included
 Does the title of report adequately capture the key concepts
and the population under investigation
 Does the problem statement indicate that study would be
ethical?
 Is feasibility apparent while reading the study?
 Is the significance of study apparent in problem
statement?
THANK YOU