Critique Elements

  • Research Problem
  • Review of Literature
  • Theoretical Framework
  • Research Hypotheses
  • Variable
  • Research Design
  • Sampling Method
  • And Other!

We Guarantee

  • Plagiarism-Free
  • Free Proofreading
  • High Quality
  • On Time Delivery
  • 100% Confidential
  • Best Prices

Our Experts

  • Relevant Degree Holders That Are Handling PhD-Level Requests
  • Highly Experienced in Critiquing
  • Know All Academic References
  • All Round Awareness of Research

Critique Process

  • Read the Entire Study Carefully
  • Examine the Organization
  • Identify Terms You Don't Understand
  • Identify the Strengths Objectively
  • Suggest Modification

Student’s Money Box

Research Critique on Management – Sample

Research Critique: Evaluating Research for Evidence-Based Practice

Name

University Affiliation

 

 

 

Introduction

Evidence-based practice (EBP) has emerged as one of the most important concepts in clinical practice and has extended to allied health professionals and educational disciplines. The popularity of EBP is attributable to the fact that it is at the core of making good healthcare decisions since it entails the use of best and most recent evidence. According to Gowing (n.d.), EBP can be described as the careful, obvious, and sensible use of the best and most recent evidence in making healthcare decisions regarding the care of individual patients. During this process, healthcare practitioners integrate individual clinical expertise with the best available clinical evidence derived from systematic research. High-quality evidence is considered to be evidence derived from systematic research that is combined with clinical expertise and patient preference to result in better care delivery services and improved patient outcomes. As a result, healthcare professionals need to use high-quality sources to help incorporate EBP in their activities. This paper examines qualitative and quantitative research in relating to EBP.

Review of a Qualitative Research Paper

The qualitative research paper to be reviewed in this segment is the study by Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) on patient burden during the process of making appointments using telephone calls in general practice (GP) services. This large-scale qualitative study examines the effectiveness of receptionists handling incoming patient falls to access healthcare services in General Practice settings.

Overview of the Study

Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) conducted the study on the premise that the proportion of patients who are satisfied with the telephone call appointment-making process varies significantly among GP services. To help determine the effectiveness of this process, the researchers analyzed phone calls from patients to their GP services for appointment or enquiries on different issues, such as regarding test results. The researchers focused on the manner with which receptionists meet patients’ requests and progresses in the interaction when something acts as an obstacle toward meeting patients’ requests. In addition, the research was influenced by the fact that there is little research on receptionists’ interactions with patients, despite the significance of GP receptionists in promoting patients’ access to primary care services.

To achieve the purpose of the study, Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) conducted a large-scale qualitative research of three services in the United Kingdom. The dataset used in the study contained recorded incoming patient telephone calls in three UK GP services, amounting to 2,780 telephone calls. In compliance with the standard ethical practice when utilizing recorded conversational data, these recordings were anonymized digitally. Upon approval by the National Health Services, the researchers transcribed 1,555 of the calls verbatim, while 447 calls were coded for different nominal categories. The data analysis process involved the use of conversation analysis technique. As described in the study, conversation analysis begins with repeatedly listening or viewing the recorded data, with the technical transcript. This process then proceeds with systematic analysis of activities that incorporate the complete interaction. This also entails systematic analysis of how those activities are developed and how various designs result in different results/outcomes. Conversation analysis also proceeds by demonstrating the participants’ tacit understanding of every preceding turn and its action instead of the analysts’ interpretations of what is happening. Consequently, the researchers focused on situations where patients seek service/call progress. As part of the data analysis process, Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) calculated the inter-rate reliability score through using Kappa score for nominal scores. The researchers identified the issue of patient burden that was defined in relation to the trouble patients demonstrate pursuing service in GP settings. The instances of the identified patient burden were quantified through the use of a coding scheme.

Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) states that patient burden manifests in two phases of the telephone calls, i.e., after initial rejection of patients’ request and after the receptionists’ instigation of call closing. Quantitative analysis employed in this large-scale qualitative study demonstrates that the three GP services included in the research vary in the frequency of patient burden. The analysis also demonstrates that there is a correlation between the extent of patient burden and autonomous national satisfaction scores for these services. Therefore, the researchers conclude that the study demonstrates communicative practices that could result in patient satisfaction or dissatisfaction. Based on the study’s results, Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) recommend various ways of enhancing receptionists’ encounters/interactions with patients through training or other kinds of intervention.

Critique of the Qualitative Study

Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) provide significant insights regarding the effectiveness of GP receptionists in handling incoming telephone calls from patients. The effectiveness of these receptionists in GP services is determined through evaluation of patient burden during appointment-making telephone calls. The study demonstrates that patients usually drive the telephone calls forward when receptionists should do so in GP services. This, in turn, generates patient burden, which has a significant direct effect on patient satisfaction with their GP service. While this study provides significant insights on this issue, the quality of evidence it provides needs to be examined. The quality of evidence should be examined in light of the recommendations provided by the researchers for EBP in GP receptionists’ handling of incoming patient calls in GP service. This segment provides a review and critique of this large-scale qualitative study with regard to the quality of evidence and across different themes, including research methodology, data collection tools, and data analysis.

Research Methodology

As previously indicated, Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) examined the effectiveness of GP receptionists’ handling of incoming patient calls to access healthcare services in these settings though the use of a large-scale qualitative research approach. Hunt, Moloney, and Fazio (2011) state that qualitative research is usually conceptualized as small-scale research or large-scale research. Small-scale qualitative research is usually conducted by a lone researcher entangled in long-term and expansive fieldwork and entails conducting in-depth interviews using a sample of between 20 and 30 participants. On the other hand, large-scale qualitative research is considered to be the domain of quantitative researchers who utilize different models, such as descriptive, formalistic survey, or explanatory methods.

Hunt, Moloney, and Fazio (2011) state that large-scale qualitative research approaches are employed when the phenomenon under investigation entails handling large-scale datasets. While qualitative research methodologies are inherently designed to handle relatively small datasets, large-scale datasets are sometimes employed in such studies, which necessitate conducting a large-scale qualitative study. The use of a large-scale qualitative research approach by Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) is suitable in this study since the phenomenon under investigation involved a large-scale dataset of 2,780 recorded telephone calls. For the researchers effectively to examine the phenomenon under investigation, a large dataset of recorded telephone calls in GP service was required. Even though these researchers identified three GP services in the United Kingdom to incorporate in the study, they still needed to handle a large-scale dataset of recorded incoming patient calls. Therefore, the existence of a large-scale dataset provided a suitable foundation and basis for conducting a large-scale qualitative study.

In addition, the use of a large-scale qualitative research approach in this study is supported by the fact that research was in the domain of quantitative researchers. Hunt, Moloney, and Fazio (2011) contend that large-scale qualitative studies are usually within the domain of quantitative researchers. Since such studies involve working with a large dataset, they incorporate some quantitative elements in the research design, data collection process, and data analysis. However, qualitative dimensions and approaches remain central in these studies. Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) effectively maintained qualitative dimension and approaches in their research while incorporating quantitative elements in the research design and data analysis as required in large-scale qualitative studies.

One of the quantitative elements in the large-scale qualitative research design employed by Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) is coding of some of the recorded conversational data using numerous nominal categories. While coding is employed in qualitative studies, its use in quantitative research involves assigning numerical values to data codes. By assigning numerous nominal categories, Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) utilized numerical values as a means of coding some of the conversational data for analysis. The coding process was utilized as a means of data analysis using conversational data analysis technique. As part of using numerical values in the research design, data analysis process in this research involved the use of Kappa score for nominal scores. Even though the researchers utilized Kappa score to calculate inter-rate reliability, the use of numerical values in the study was the other quantitative element employed in this large-scale qualitative study. Kappa scores were used to calculate inter-reliability rate during the data analysis process in this research.

Data Collection and Sampling

Gill et al. (2008) states that data collection in qualitative research mostly entails the use of interviews and focus groups, which are the most common data collection techniques in qualitative studies. This study does not employ the most common data collection techniques, but relies on observation and analysis of existing recorded telephone calls from patients to GP services. Even though interviews and focus groups are the most commonly used data collection techniques, qualitative research also employs other data collection measures, such as observations. Therefore, the use of observations in this study as a means of data collection is appropriate toward achieving the purpose of the research. As part of the observation, the researchers transcribe some of the recordings and codes others using numerous nominal categories. This is consistent with data collection techniques in qualitative studies in which audio- or video-recording data collection requires transcription of the recordings verbatim prior to the data analysis process (Sutton & Austin, 2015).

With regard to sampling, the use of three GP practices as a representative sample is appropriate in this study since data collection in qualitative research is usually conducted on a smaller sample in comparison to quantitative approaches. Therefore, using a representative sample of three GP services constitutes a smaller sample that would help achieve the purpose of the study. However, the report does not discuss the sampling technique used to select the three GP services. As noted by Sutton and Austin (2015), appropriate sampling techniques should be utilized to determine a representative sample from the target population when conducting qualitative research. For this study, the researchers neither discuss the sampling technique nor provide the criterion utilized to identify these three GP services. Consequently, the lack of a sampling technique is one of the major weaknesses of this large-scale qualitative study.

Data Analysis

The data analysis process in this large-scale qualitative study commences with coding of the recorded incoming telephone calls from patients. This is appropriate in qualitative research, as demonstrated by Sutton and Austin (2015), who contend that once recordings or interviews are transcribed and checked, coding begins. The coding process entails identifying topics, issues, similarities, and differences. Coding process is conducted as part of the qualitative data analysis to enable the researcher(s) to understand the world from the perspective of all participants or respondents in the study. In this study, Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) employed coding through classifying recorded data in numerous nominal categories. The process of categorization of the data using these nominal classes was geared toward calculating inter-rate reliability score. To ensure that the coding process is aligned with qualitative data analysis processes, Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) divided the analysis into four major sections. These sections are an unmet request burden, call closing burden, patient burden, and successful practice and decreased patient burden.

The data analysis technique used in this research is conversation analysis, which focuses on the social organization of talk-in-interaction and conversation. Conversation analysis examines the social organization of these concepts through a comprehensive inspection of tape recordings and transcriptions from these recordings (ten Have, n.d.). Given the major focus of conversation analysis, as indicated by ten Have (n.d.), the use of this technique in this large-scale qualitative study is appropriate. Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) relied on recordings of incoming patient telephone calls to the three GP services included in the study. Therefore, the researchers needed to use a data analysis technique that focuses on inspection of recordings and their transcriptions. This implies that the use of conversation analysis in this large-scale qualitative research is appropriate.

The suitability of conversation analysis in this large-scale qualitative study is also evident in the fact that the data analysis technique entails the use of audio- or video-recordings of naturally occurring instances that are non-experimental. Additionally, recorded data are rich in empirical detail that could never be created by human imagination. By using analyzed recorded data, Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) utilized data that is rich in empirical detail and would help answer the research question. Conversation analysis of the recorded data in this research enables the researchers to obtain and examine a wide range of interactional materials and circumstances. As a result, the study’s findings are reliable since they are based on empirically rich data that has not been manipulated or controlled by the researcher(s).

Validity, Reliability, and Generalizability

While conversation analysis is a suitable data analysis technique for this study, it has some inherent weaknesses that could affect the reliability of the study findings. Ten Have (n.d.) indicates that one of the weaknesses of this approach is the use of a very restricted database, i.e., recordings of interactions that have occurred naturally, which severely limits the validity of a study’s findings. This could be a major issue in the study conducted by Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016), since they relied on the restricted database. Secondly, similar to other studies conducted using conversation analysis, this large-scale qualitative research does not include data or information about participants. Ten Have (n.d.) states that studies employing conversation analysis tend to lack data regarding the participants’ age, gender, socioeconomic status, individual background, and institutional position. Third, such studies tend to ignore the institutional context of the interactions in the recorded data.

The weaknesses of conversation analysis could significantly affect the validity and reliability of the findings of this large-scale qualitative study. Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) do not discuss measures utilized to ensure the reliability and validity of the study, especially in relation to the inherent weaknesses in conversation analysis. By failing to discuss reliability and validity, it is difficult to establish the reliability and validity of the study’s findings. However, the inherent weaknesses of this data analysis technique does not necessarily imply that the study’s findings are unreliable or cannot be generalized. Regardless of these inherent weaknesses, Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) relies on recorded data that is rich in empirical detail. Additionally, the researchers did not manipulate or interfere with the data since it was already obtained from naturally occurring interactions. To this extent, the study’s findings can be considered reliable and can be generalized. As indicated by Sutton & Austin (2015), one of the major steps toward generating reliable and generalizable study findings is to use rich data obtained in the participants’ normal context. Through the use of recorded data, Sikveland, Stokoe & Symonds (2016) relied on data obtained from the participants normal context, which enhances reliability and generalizability of the findings.

The nature of the phenomenon under investigation did not require obtaining participants’ information, but on examining interactions. Therefore, the lack of participant information or data in this study do not affect the validity of the findings. This is primarily because Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) focused on examining interactions between patients and GP receptionists during telephone calls. The evaluation of these interactions would help to understand the effectiveness of receptionists’ handling incoming patient calls to GP services. Therefore, patients’ background information is not a necessary research variable in this study because it focuses on the interactions. To this extent, the researchers effectively examined interactions in the recorded telephone conversations, which resulted in reliable and generalizable research results/findings.

Third, unlike other studies employing conversation analysis technique, this large-scale qualitative research incorporates the institutional context of the interactions in the recorded telephone conversations. Therefore, this inherent weakness of conversation analysis does not apply in this study because the researchers examined recorded telephone conversations between GP receptionists and patients. The interactions between these two parties occurred within the context of seeking access to healthcare services provided by GP facilities. This implies that the institutional context for the interactions is the GP setting and relates to access to healthcare services for different clinical conditions.

Ethics

Sanjari et al. (2014) states that given the nature of qualitative studies, ethics can be a major challenge for researchers in relation to their interactions with participants. Qualitative researchers in the healthcare field face numerous ethical challenges in all states of the research from the design to the reporting stage. Some of the major ethical challenges faced by these researchers include informed consent, anonymity, confidentiality, and probable impact on researcher/participants. As a result, Sanjari et al. (2014) states that the establishment of specific ethical guidelines is critical when conducting qualitative research.

In this large-scale qualitative study, Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) did not directly deal with research participants. Since they focused on examining recorded data, the researchers did not have any direct interactions with the study’s participants or respondents. However, ethics was still a major issue since the researchers handled relatively confidential information from patients and the receptionists. Ethics was a major issue in the study because these researchers were third parties accessing critical health data in the three GP services. The study seemingly recognizes the significance of following ethical guidelines given the nature of data availed to the researchers. As a result, the researchers sought for consent from the National Research and Ethics Service to use the recorded data. They were granted consent to use the data for improvement methodologies or service evaluation in a manner that is consistent with national guidance. In addition, the researchers addressed potential ethical issues in the study by following standard ethical practice for the use of recorded conversational data. In this regard, Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) anonymized the recordings digitally as part of measures to address ethical concerns relating to anonymity and confidentiality. The lack of patient background information in the study helped to address privacy and confidentiality concerns.

Despite these measures, the ethical rigor of this large-scale qualitative study is inherently weak. While the researchers obtained consent from the National Research and Ethics Service to use the recorded data, they did not discuss how the data were utilized. The report assumes that the reader understands the national guidance on ethical use of recorded data in a study or guidelines established by the National Research and Ethics Service. This assumption seemingly influences the lack of discussion or explanations on how the researchers complied with the relevant guidelines. Second, the researchers did not provide discussion on measures undertaken to protect participants’ confidentiality or privacy given that some of the recorded telephone conversations could have personal identification information of patients. This was a major challenge for these researchers, as indicated by Kaiser (2009), that qualitative researchers face numerous problems in maintaining participant confidentiality when dealing with rich, detailed accounts of the participants’ life. Third, the study has a weak ethical rigor because it does not provide additional measures used by the researchers to address ethical considerations that could have emerged when conducting the study.

Research Findings

The study’s results or findings are presented in an appropriate manner since the researchers provide both qualitative and quantitative data. Hunt, Moloney, and Fazio (2011) state that large-scale qualitative studies deal with both qualitative and quantitative data, which implies that study results are presented qualitatively and quantitatively. In this regard, Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) provide both qualitative and quantitative results as required in large-scale qualitative research. The presentation of the research results is organized in an easily flowing manner that makes it easier for the reader to understand. This is primarily because the data are presented in four different segments that act as the data analysis categories. In each of these four different segments, Sikveland, Stokoe, and Symonds (2016) provide relevant qualitative and quantitative data that helps to answer the research question and achieve the purpose of the study. These researchers then utilize results in each of these categories to make conclusions on the study’s findings and phenomenon under investigation.

Review of a Quantitative Research Paper

The quantitative research paper to be reviewed in this segment is the study by Khamisa et al. (2016) on work related to stress of nurses. This quantitative follow-up study examines work-related stress, job satisfaction, burnout, and the general health of nurse practitioners. The study, which employed longitudinal research design, focuses on enhancing understanding of the link among work-related stress, job satisfaction, burnout, and general health of nurses and the nature of their work.

Overview of the Study

Khamisa et al. (2016) conducted this quantitative longitudinal research on the premise that nurses tend to experience high levels of work-related burnout and stress as well as poor general health and low job satisfaction because of the nature of their work. In addition, the researchers conducted the study on the premise that work-related stress and burnout contribute to poor physical and psychological health among nurses. Existing literature demonstrates that healthcare professionals, such as nurses, experience high levels of burnout as compared to other professionals in other employment sectors. Healthcare occupations and professions are characterized by exposure to numerous stressors because of job demands, complexity in delivery of patient care, staff issues, overtime work, and lack of support. The nature of the healthcare environment enhances the likelihood of nurses and other health professionals to develop work-related stress and burnout that, in turn, contributes to low job satisfaction and poor general health (Khamisa et al., 2016).

These researchers state that the relationship among work-related stress, job satisfaction, burnout, and overall health can be demonstrated through Maslach’s Burnout Model. Based on this model, prolonged exposure to situational and environmental stressors contributed to work-related stress and burnout, which, in turn, affects job satisfaction and general health. While this relationship is explained through Maslach’s Burnout Model, Khamisa et al. (2016) state that there is limited evidence of the link between burnout and job satisfaction, particularly in developing contexts. Therefore, these researchers contend that there is need to understand this relationship, given the challenging working conditions for nurses in developing contexts and high burnout among nurses in South Africa. As a result, the researchers sought to examine the nature of relationships among work-related burnout, stress, general health, and job satisfaction of nurses in developing contexts.

Khamisa et al. (2016) collected data for a period of one year to answer the research question and test hypotheses. Data were collected from 277 nurses in four hospitals and analyzed using general estimation equation analysis. The study found that lack of support in the healthcare environment was linked to burnout, while patient care was linked with job satisfaction. In addition, staff issues were linked to the general health of nurses. Based on the study’s findings, Khamisa et al. (2016) concluded that the results could inform EBP and practice through promoting the development of interventions that seek to enhance job satisfaction. These interventions should also focus on lessening the impact of burnout on nurses’ general health.

Critique of the Quantitative Study

Khamisa et al. (2016) provide significant insights regarding the nature of relationships among several critical factors in the effectiveness of nurses in the healthcare environment, i.e., work related burnout, stress, job satisfaction, and general health. This assessment is critical toward enhancing the overall effectiveness and experiences of nurses since these four factors affect the quality of nursing practice by shaping the individual experiences of nurses. Even though this research provides significant insights on this issue, its quality of evidence can be determined through critical review and critique. This segment provides a critical review and critique of this quantitative study based on the various segments of the research.

Research Methodology

Khamisa et al. (2016) sought to examine the nature of relationships among work-related burnout, stress, general health, and job satisfaction through conducting a quantitative longitudinal study. Caruana et al. (2015) state that longitudinal studies entail repeated or ongoing measures to follow specific individuals over a period of time that ranges between years to decades. For this study, the use of longitudinal research design was suitable since it enabled the researchers to follow up with the participants for a period of one year. The nature of the issue under investigation required data to be collected and analyzed over a period of time in order to demonstrate the nature of relationships among work-related burnout, stress, job satisfaction, and general health. Without employing a methodology that supports data collection and analysis over a period of time, these researchers would have been unable to achieve the purpose of the study and/or provide reliable research findings. Therefore, Khamisa et al. (2016) employed an appropriate research design by conducting a longitudinal quantitative study in which data were collected and analyzed for one year, i.e., between 2013 and 2014. Longitudinal research designs usually take different forms that could be observational or experimental. In this study, Khamisa et al. (2016) employed longitudinal prospective research design since the same participants were followed over a period of time, as indicated by Caruana et al. (2015). The suitability of longitudinal research design in this study is also evident in the fact that it enabled researchers to study the effect of time on the study subjects better than in cross-sectional studies.

Despite the suitability of this research design, one of the weaknesses of this study is high attrition rates among the study’s participants. Caruana et al. (2015) indicates that one of the major weaknesses of longitudinal studies is incomplete and interrupted follow-up of participants and attrition. While Khamisa et al. (2016) recognizes that the study’s setting is characterized by high attrition rates, it fails to discuss how attrition was mitigated in this research. This implies that the study’s findings could have been affected by attrition among the individuals under observation. The potential for attrition and its negative impacts on the study are evident in the fact that the number of nurses who participated in the study decreased from 1,200 to 277 over time.

Data Collection and Sampling

With regard to sampling, the researchers selected 23% of the target population to participate in the study. Khamisa et al. (2016) state that out of the targeted 1,200 nurses for this research, only 23%, i.e. 277 nurses, agreed to participate in the study and to be followed-up a year later. This sample size was adequate for a quantitative study since these types of research usually employ a large sample in comparison to qualitative studies. Martinez-Mesa et al. (2014) indicates that the higher the expected prevalence, the larger the required sample size for research. However, when the expected prevalence exceeds 50%, the required sample size significantly reduces. In this regard, Martinez-Mesa et al. (2014) state that the sample size of an expected prevalence of 90% is similar to that of an expected prevalence of 10%. Therefore, by selecting 23% of the target population to participate in this study, Khamisa et al. (2016) utilized an appropriate sample size. The expected prevalence of the issue of work-related burnout, stress, job satisfaction, and general health among the targeted nurses was more than 90%. Therefore, the expected prevalence exceeded 50%, which implied that a relatively small percentage of the target population was an adequate sample size for the population. However, these researchers did not provide the sampling technique used to determine an appropriate sample size. From the report, the sample size was basically determined based on individual willingness to participate in the research rather than the use of a specific sampling technique to identify a suitable sample.

For data collection, the researchers relied on five questionnaires that were administered to the participants. These researchers do not indicate the intervals or duration with which these nurses were required to complete the questionnaires. While the study lacks information on intervals with which participants were required to complete the questionnaires, taking more measurements within the same duration has minimal effect on the variance, as shown by Cook and Ware (1983). Cook and Ware (1983) contend that increasing duration between measurements in a longitudinal study lessens variance substantially. In this study, determination of variance is difficult because the researchers do not indicate whether study participants completed each of the questionnaires within the same duration or intervals to help reduce variance.

Data Analysis

Caruana et al. (2015) indicates that data in a longitudinal study is analyzed statistically based on various factors. For this study, Khamisa et al. (2016) employed Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) as the statistical analysis technique. Data from the questionnaires were scored and entered into SPSS version 20 before being analyzed using GEE. GEE is an appropriate statistical analysis technique for a longitudinal study since it relies on independence of individuals within the population as a means of focusing on regression data. By using GEE, Khamisa et al. (2016) effectively examined the nature of relationships among the research variables through reliance on independence of the research participants or individuals under evaluation. These researchers achieved repeated observations with logical statistical efficiency due to reliance on independence of individuals in the research brought by GEE analysis technique. Khamisa et al. (2016) avoided inaccuracies in data analysis in a longitudinal study by ensuring that repeated hypothesis testing was not applied to the data as indicated by Caruana et al. (2015).

Validity, Reliability and Generalizability

Even though the researchers utilized appropriate research design and data analysis technique, the validity, reliability, and generalizability of the findings were affected by some factors. On one hand, the study’s findings can be considered reliable and generalizable since the researchers did not conduct repeated hypothesis testing of data. Caruana et al. (2015) suggests that longitudinal studies generate unreliable findings when repeated hypothesis testing is applied to data similar to cross-sectional studies. For this study, repeated hypothesis testing was not conducted, which enhanced the validity, reliability, and generalizability of the findings. In addition, the use of a suitable representative sample could be regarded as one of the measures to ensure the validity, reliability, and generalizability of study findings. On the other hand, the validity of research findings and results is affected by the high attrition rates due to complexities in the nursing environment. The lack of clarity on efforts made by the researchers to ensure maximal retention of participants implies that the findings could have been affected by the high attrition rates. Additionally, Khamisa et al. (2016) seemingly underestimated variability in this research by failing to establish intervals or durations in which the participants completed each of the five questionnaires in the survey.

Ethics

Khamisa et al. (2016) effectively safeguarded research participants, as required, when conducting longitudinal quantitative studies. Caruana et al. (2015) states that ethical and consent considerations are necessary in longitudinal studies. To this extent, Khamisa et al. (2016) addressed ethical considerations by requiring participants to fill an informed consent form prior to inclusion in the research. However, a sample of the informed consent form is not provided while the researchers failed to discuss measures undertaken to ensure privacy and confidentiality.

Reflective Conclusion

This assignment has provided significant insights on how to examine and determine the quality of evidence of a study. Through examining the qualitative and quantitative research papers, the process has provided insights on how the quality of evidence extends beyond the findings of the study. In this regard, the quality of evidence in a study is determined through consideration of various factors, depending on the specific research methodology and research design employed in the study. While research design plays a critical role in determining the quality of a study’s evidence, qualitative and quantitative studies are examined differently. This difference is attributable to the inherent variations in qualitative and quantitative research methodologies. In addition, the process of examining a study to determine the quality of evidence entails examining the strengths and weaknesses of the research. Each research has some strengths and weaknesses, which affects the quality of evidence it produces. A review and critique of the strengths and weaknesses of a study helps better to understand the research in terms of its findings and conclusions.

 

References

Caruana et al. (2015, November). Longitudinal Studies. Journal of Thoracic Disease, 7(11), e537-e540.

Cook, N.R. & Ware, J.H. (1983). Design and Analysis: Methods for Longitudinal Research. Annual Reviews of Public Health, 4, 1-23.

Gill et al. (2008, March 22). Methods of Data Collection in Qualitative Research: Interviews and Focus Groups. British Dental Journal, 204, 291-295.

Gowing, L. (n.d.). Evidence-based Practice: From Concepts to Reality. Retrieved from Flinders University website: http://nceta.flinders.edu.au/files/3912/5548/1446/EN55.pdf

Hunt, G., Moloney, M. & Fazio, A. (2011, December 21). Embarking on Large-scale Qualitative Research: Reaping the Benefits of Mixed Methods in Studying Youth, Clubs and Drugs. Nordic Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 28(5-6), 433-452.

Kaiser, K. (2009, November). Protecting Respondent Confidentiality in Qualitative Research. Qualitative Health Research, 19(11), 1632-1641.

Khamisa et al. (2016). Work Related Stress, Burnout, Job Satisfaction, and General Health of Nurses: A Follow-up Study. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 22, 538-545.

Martinez-Mesa et al. (2014, July-August). Sample Size: How Many Participants Do I Need in My Research? Brazilian Annals of Dermatology, 89(4), 609-615.

Sanjari et al. (2014, August 4). Ethical Challenges of Researchers in Qualitative Studies: The Necessity to Develop a Specific Guideline. Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, 7(14). Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4263394/

Sikveland, R.O., Stokoe, E. & Symonds, J. (2016). Patient Burden During Appointment-making Telephone Calls to GP Practices. Patient Education & Counseling, 99(8), 1310-1318.

Sutton, J. & Austin, Z. (2015, May-June). Qualitative Research: Data Collection, Analysis and Management. The Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy, 68(3), 226-231.

Ten Have, P. (n.d.). Methodological Issues in Conversation Analysis. Retrieved December 4, 2018, from http://www.paultenhave.nl/mica.htm