Qualitative Research Critique of "Life with a Urostomy"

Aspect of the Report

Critiquing Questions

Introduction

Statement of the problem

• Was the problem stated unambiguously and is it easy to identify?

• Did the problem statement build a cogent and persuasive argument for the new study?

• Was the problem significant for nursing? Provide a brief explanation.

Research questions

• Were research questions explicitly stated? If not, was their absence justified?

Literature review

• Did the report adequately summarize the existing body of knowledge related to the problem or phenomenon of interest?

• Did the literature review provide a strong basis for the new study?

Conceptual underpinnings

• Was the philosophical basis, underlying tradition, conceptual framework, or ideologic orientation made explicit and was it appropriate for the problem?

Method

Protection of human rights

• Were appropriate procedures used to safeguard the rights of study participants?

• Was the study approved by an IRB/ethics review board?

Research design and research tradition

• Was the identified research tradition (if any) congruent with the methods used to collect and analyze data?

• Was an adequate amount of time spent with study participants?

• Was there an adequate number of contacts with study participants?

Sample and setting

• Was the group or population of interest adequately described? Were the setting and sample described in sufficient detail?

• Was the approach used to recruit participants or gain access to the site productive and appropriate?

• Was the best possible method of sampling used to enhance information richness and address the needs of the study?

• Was the sample size adequate? Was saturation achieved?

Data collection

• Were the methods of gathering data appropriate?

• Did the researcher ask the right questions or make the right observations, and were they recorded in an appropriate fashion?

• Was a sufficient amount of data gathered? Were the data of sufficient depth and richness?

Procedures

• Were data collection and recording procedures adequately described and do they appear appropriate?

• Were data collected in a manner that minimized bias? Were the staff who collected data appropriately trained?

Enhancement of trustworthiness

• What methods did the researchers use to enhance the trustworthiness/integrity of the study? Were those methods adequate?

• Was there evidence of researcher reflexivity?

• Was there “thick description” of the context, participants, and finding?

Results

Data analysis

• Were the data analysis methods adequately described?

• Was the data analysis strategy compatible with the research tradition and with the nature and type of data gathered?

• Did the analysis yield an appropriate “product” (e.g., a theory, taxonomy, thematic pattern)?

• Did the analytic procedures suggest the possibility of biases?

Findings

• Were the findings effectively summarized, with good use of excerpts and supporting arguments?

• Did the themes adequately capture the meaning of the data? Does it appear that the researcher satisfactorily conceptualized the themes or patterns in the data?

• Did the analysis yield an insightful, provocative, authentic, and meaningful picture of the phenomenon under investigation?

Theoretical integration

• Were the themes or patterns logically connected to each other to form a convincing and integrated whole?

• Were figures, maps, or models used effectively to summarize conceptualizations?

Discussion

Interpretation of the findings

• Were the findings interpreted within an appropriate social or cultural context?

• Were major findings interpreted and discussed within the context of prior studies?

• Were the interpretations consistent with the study’s limitations?

Implications/Recommendations

• Did the researchers discuss the implications of the study for clinical practice or further research—and were those implications reasonable and complete?

Conclusion

• Summarize the key strengths and weaknesses.

• Determine whether or not the study provided sufficient evidence for future research and clinical practice.

• If the study is trustworthy, discuss how you would apply the evidence to your current practice, future role option, or future research.