Rough Draft Qualitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations
Write a critical appraisal that demonstrates comprehension of two qualitative research studies. Use the “Research Critique Guidelines – Part 1” document to organize your essay. Successful completion of this assignment requires that you provide rationale, include examples, and reference content from the studies in your responses.
Use the practice problem and two qualitative, peer-reviewed research article you identified in the Topic 1 assignment to complete this assignment.
In a 1,000–1,250 word essay, summarize two qualitative studies, explain the ways in which the findings might be used in nursing practice, and address ethical considerations associated with the conduct of the study.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
Rubic_Print_
Format
| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points | |||||||
| NRS-433V | NRS-433V-OL191 | Rough Draft Qualitative Research Critique and | Ethical Considerations | 200.0 | ||||||
| Criteria | Percentage | 1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | 2: Less Than Satisfactory (75.00%) | 3: Satisfactory (83.00%) | 4: Good (94.00%) | 5: Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned | ||
| Content | 7 | 5.0% | ||||||||
| Qualitative Studies | Only one article is presented. Neither of the articles presented use qualitative research. | Two articles are presented. Of the articles presented, only one article is based on qualitative research. | N/A | Two articles are presented. Both articles are based on qualitative research. | ||||||
| Background of Study | 10.0% | Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is incomplete. | Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is included but lacks relevant details and explanation. | Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is partially complete and includes some relevant details and explanation. | Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation. | Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation. | ||||
| Article Support of Nursing Practice Issue | 15.0% | Discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is incomplete. | A summary of how articles support the PICOT question is presented. It is unclear how the articles can be used to answer the proposed PICOT question. Significant information and detail are required. | A general discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate general support in answering the proposed PICOT question. It is unclear how the interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in the PICOT question. Some rational or information is needed. | A discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate support in answering the proposed PICOT question. The interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in the PICOT question. Minor detail or rational is needed for clarity or support. | A clear discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate strong support in answering the proposed PICOT question. The interventions and comparison groups in the articles strongly compare to those identified in the PICOT question. | ||||
| Method of Study | Discussion on the method of study for each article is omitted. The comparison of study methods is omitted or incomplete. | A partial summary of the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is incomplete. A benefit and a limitation of each method are omitted or incomplete. There are significant inaccuracies. | A general discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is summarized. A benefit and a limitation of each method are summarized. There some inaccuracies or partial omissions. More information is needed. | A discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is generally described. A benefit and a limitation of each method are presented. There minor are inaccuracies. Some detail is required for accuracy or clarity. | A thorough discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is described in detail. A benefit and a limitation of each method are presented. The discussion demonstrates a solid understanding of research methods. | |||||
| Results of Study | Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is incomplete. | A summary of the study results includes findings and implications for nursing practice but lacks relevant details and explanation. There are some omissions or inaccuracies. | Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is generally presented. Overall, the discussion includes some relevant details and explanation. | Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation. | Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation. | |||||
| Discussion of ethical considerations when conducting nursing research is incomplete. A discussion on ethical considerations of the two articles presented in the essay is incomplete. | Discussion of ethical considerations when conducting nursing research is included but lacks relevant details and explanation. A discussion on ethical considerations of the two articles used in the essay is summarized but there are significant inaccuracies or omissions. | Discussion of ethical considerations when conducting nursing research is partially complete and includes some relevant details and explanation. A discussion on ethical considerations of the two articles used in the essay is discussed but there are some inaccuracies, or some information is needed. | Discussion of ethical considerations when conducting nursing research is complete and includes relevant details and explanation. A discussion on ethical considerations of the two articles used in the essay is presented; some detail in needed for accuracy or clarity. | Discussion of ethical considerations associated with the conduct of nursing research is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation. A detailed discussion on ethical considerations of the two articles used in the essay is presented. | ||||||
| Organization and Effectiveness | ||||||||||
| Thesis Development and Purpose | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. | Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. | |||||
| Argument Logic and Construction | Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. | Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. | Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. | Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Argument is clear and convincing and presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. | |||||
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. | |||||
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. | |||||
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. | |||||
| Total Weightage | 100% |
ResearchCritique Guidelines – Part I
Use this document to organize your essay. Successful completion of this assignment requires that you provide a rationale, include examples, and reference content from the studies in your responses.
Qualitative Studies
Background of Study
1. Summary of studies. Include problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research question.
How do these two articles support the nurse practice issue you chose?
1. Discuss how these two articles will be used to answer your PICOT question.
2
. Describe how the interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in your PICOT question.
Method of Study:
1. State the methods of the two articles you are comparing and describe how they are different.
2. Consider the methods you identified in your chosen articles and state one benefit and one limitation of each method.
Results of Study
1. Summarize the key findings of each study in one or two comprehensive paragraphs.
2.
What are the implications of the two studies in nursing practice?
Ethical Considerations
1. Discuss two ethical consideration in conducting research.
2. Describe how the researchers in the two articles you choose took these ethical considerations into account while performing their research.
© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
2
Literature Evaluation Table
Student Name:
Summary of Clinical Issue
The clinical issue, in this case, is patient infections. Hospitals have always been a place of refuge for patients but there is a worrying fact about infections in hospitals. Some of the patients are taken to the hospital to get better but they leave with more infections than they came in with. The issue of infections in hospitals is motivated by two major factors. The first factor is associated with medical errors. Most of the infections which occur in hospitals affect people who have gone through surgeries are people who are receiving blood, water, and food through tubes. It, therefore, means that in most cases, doctors are responsible for infections. When the inner body organs are exposed to the environment, they get exposed to germs and germs increase the chances of infections. The second factor that supports infections is hygiene in the hospital. A hospital is a sensitive place and therefore, there is a dire need to make sure that it is hygienically fit for patients. Dirt has the ability to increase high exposure to infections. Contaminated foods and drinks increase the chances of infections. It is essential to note that the cleanliness of the water and other equipment that is used in hospitals is imperative.
PICOT Question:
In hospital infections, can improved hospital hygiene reduces the number of hospital infections among patients of all ages in the next twelve months?
Criteria
Article 1
Article 2
Article 3
APA-Formatted Article Citation with Permalink
Saint, S. (2017). Can intersectional innovations reduce hospital infection?. Journal of Hospital Infection, 9
5
(2), 129-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2016.11.013
Starr, J. B., Tirschwell, D. L., & Becker, K. J. (2017). Labetalol use is associated with increased in-hospital infection compared with nicardipine use in intracerebral hemorrhage. Stroke, 48(10), 2693-2698.
https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.017230
Van Kleef, E., Luangasanatip, N., Bonten, M. J., & Cooper, B. S. (2017). Why sensitive bacteria are resistant to hospital infection control. Wellcome open research, 2. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5721567/
How Does the Article Relate to the PICOT Question?
The article focuses on the PICOT question.
The article focuses on the PICOT question.
The article focuses on the PICOT question.
Quantitative, Qualitative (How do you know?)
It is qualitative research because it has employed a qualitative design.
It is quantitative research because it has employed a quantitative design.
It is quantitative research because it has employed a quantitative design.
Purpose Statement
To know the role that innovations play in reducing infections in hospitals
The purpose of the article is to know the factors that increase the chances of hospital infections.
The purpose is to know more about the resistance of antibiotics as far as
Research Question
Can intersectional innovations reduce hospital infection?
Is labetalol use is associated with increased in-hospital infection compared with nicardipine use in intracerebral hemorrhage
Why are sensitive bacteria resistant to hospital infection control?
Outcome
Innovations can reduce numbers of infections by a significant percentage
Drugs can reduce cases of reinfections.
Sensitive bacteria are resistant to hospital infection control
Setting
(Where did the study take place?)
Surgical ICU in Miami
Online materials
Other articles and reports that focused on the same topic.
Sample
Patients and other research findings
The article used findings from other research articles
The article used findings from other research articles
Method
Randomized trial
Statistical Analysis
dynamic deterministic compartmental transmission model
Key Findings of the Study
Innovations have the power to reduce hospital infections
The use of some drugs can reduce the cases of infections
Resistant bacteria increase the chances of infection
Recommendations of the Researcher
Collect raw data in the next research
Collect raw data in the next research
The researchers should use more diverse data
Criteria
Article 4
Article 5
Article 6
APA-Formatted Article Citation with Permalink
Thompson, N. D., Edwards, J. R., Dudeck, M. A., Fridkin, S. K., & Magill, S. S. (2016). Evaluating the use of the case mix index for risk adjustment of healthcare-associated infection data: an illustration using Clostridium difficile infection data from the National Healthcare Safety Network. infection control & hospital epidemiology, 37(1), 19-25. https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2015.252
Barrios-Torres, S. I., Umscheid, C. A., Bratzler, D. W., Leas, B., Stone, E. C., Kelz, R. R., … & Dellinger, E. P. (2017). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline for the prevention of surgical site infection, 2017. JAMA Surgery, 152(8), 784-791. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamasurgery/fullarticle/2623725
van Beek, J., van der Eijk, A. A., Fraaij, P. L. A., Caliskan, K., Cransberg, K., Dalinghaus, M., … & Koopmans, M. P. G. (2017). Chronic norovirus infection among solid organ recipients in a tertiary care hospital, the Netherlands, 2006–2014. Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 23(4), 265-e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2016.12.010
How Does the Article Relate to the PICOT Question?
The article focuses on the PICOT question.
The article focuses on the PICOT question.
The article focuses on the PICOT question.
Quantitative, Qualitative (How do you know?)
It is quantitative research because it has employed a quantitative design.
It is qualitative research because it has employed a qualitative design
It is qualitative research because it has employed a qualitative design
Purpose Statement
To identify the recent information about hospital infections
The purpose of the article is to state the different methods for reducing cases of hospital infections
The rates of infection among patients who receive solid organs.
Research Question
How can infection data be used to better the situation of hospital infections?
What are the ways of avoiding surgical site infections?
what does chronic norovirus infection among solid organ recipients in a tertiary care hospital, the Netherlands, 2006–2014 data say about hospital infections?
Outcome
Infections data can be used to better the situation of hospital infections.
Hospitals can enhance efficiency to reduce cases of hospital infections.
The number of hospital infections has been increasing since 2006.
Setting
(Where did the study take place?)
NHSN facility-wide laboratory
There was no physical setup
Erasmus Medical Center
Sample
1,468 acute care hospitals
Cochrane Library
2182 recipients of solid organs
Method
Multivariate analysis
Systematic review
Key Findings of the Study
using Clostridium difficile Infection Data from the National Healthcare Safety Network will help to know more about hospital infections.
bathing with soap before surgery is a good way to reduce surgical infections.
recipients of solid organs are exposed to the danger of hospital infections
Recommendations of the Researcher
The researcher should narrow down the focus
Collect raw data in the next research
Collect raw data in the next research
© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
5