DNP 816 Statistics research critique

Please follow the instructions and write the critique directly into the rubric provided below.

Quantitative Critique Rubric- 5.25.2020
Student Name:
Areas of critique
Intent of the
Research (7)
Significance of
study (5)
Methods (26)
Questions to be answered regarding article
Is the title of the study clear? (1)
What is the research question(s) if stated?
What is the hypothesis if stated? (3)
What are the issues or variables being studied?
Are there Independent & Dependent variables
identified? (3)
How is the research problem significant to
nursing?
How will the findings improve practice? (5)
What is the study design? Describe. Was
this appropriate? (5) What is the level of
evidence in this research? Describe model
used to evaluate level of research (3)
Was the sample randomized or not
randomized? Was the sample selection
addressed?(3)
Was the sample size adequate? Was there
a power analysis done? (3)
What evidence was provided that biases were
eliminated or minimized? What steps were
taken to control confounding participant
characteristics that could affect the
equivalence of groups being compared? Were
these steps adequate? (6)
What were the inclusion and exclusion
criteria? (3)
Describe the instruments used- were they
reliable/valid? Is this addressed? (3)
Quantitative Critique Rubric 5.25.2020
Article Title:
Critique Responses
Points achieved
Procedures (6)
Analysis (32)
Results and
Interpretation (24)
Describe how the data was collected- was
it consistent? (3)
Were the dependent variables always
obtained in the same manner? (3)
What type of analysis was done? Identify
the statistics used-were they appropriate
for level of measurement? All
assumptions met? (5) Was rationale
provided for use of statistical tests?
Was analysis appropriate for the
design/methods used? (3)
Were the relevant sample demographics
described? (3) Were they used to answer
RQ when inferential statistics would have
been more appropriate? (3)
What were the results of the study? (3)
Were any results significant? What do the
tests tell about the RQ or hypotheses? (3)
Were any tests non-significant? Is it
plausible that these reflect a Type II error?
(3) What factors might have undermined
the study’s statistical conclusion validity?
(3)
Was an appropriate amount of statistical
information reported? Are the findings clearly
and logically organized? (3) Were tables or
figures used to summarize large amounts of
statistical information? (3)
What was the researcher’s interpretation of
the results? (3)
Quantitative Critique Rubric 5.25.2020
Do the results make sense? Did the
researcher develop reasonable conclusions?
(3)
Do the researchers discuss the limitations of
the study and their possible effects on the
credibility of the research? (3) Did the
researchers discuss the generalizability of the
results? (3) Did the researchers discuss the
implications for clinical practice? (3)
What is your interpretation of the results?
(3)
How would you improve upon this study if
you were to conduct a similar study? (3)
Can the study results make an important
contribution? (3)
Total points: 100
Quantitative Critique Rubric 5.25.2020
Surgical Patient Satisfaction Sample Quantitative Critique Rubric- 5.25.2020
Student Name:
Areas of critique
Intent of the
Research (7)
Significance of
study (5)
Methods (26)
Questions to be answered regarding
article
Is the title of the study clear? (1)
Article Title:
Critique Responses
The title of the study is clear in its intention of creating an adequate
introduction into the study by incorporating key words and phrases indicative
of the variables
What is the research question(s) if stated? How is patient’s perception of nursing care related to their satisfaction, are
What is the hypothesis if stated? (3)
there differences of perceived nursing care between the six chosen European
countries, and what specific behaviors of nursing care affect patient
satisfaction. The hypothesis was not stated within the article.
What are the issues or variables being
Caring behaviors of nurses, and patient satisfaction; the independent variables
studied? Are there Independent &
of nursing care behaviors were: connectedness, assurance, respectful, as well
Dependent variables identified? (3)
as, knowledge, and skills. The dependent variables of patient satisfaction
perception included: technical-scientific care needs, information care needs,
and interaction-support needs.
How is the research problem
Authors emphasized the importance of effective nursing care education,
significant to nursing?
generate a working environment that would foster an increase in nurses’ caring
How will the findings improve
ability, and influence an assimilation of a cohesive nursing education program
practice? (5)
for all countries involved. Information obtained would impact those who work
towards improving of nursing care
Multicentered correlation design to examine the relationship between multiple
What is the study design? Describe.
Was this appropriate? (5) What is the factors, centered around the two primary variables of nursing care and patient
satisfaction. Yes, appropriate design. This is a Level 3 evidence since it is a
level of evidence in this research?
Describe model used to evaluate level non-experimental design with a convenience sample according to the Johns
Hopkins rubric
of research (3)
Was the sample randomized or not
Convenience sample- not randomized
randomized?(3)
What was the process used for sample
Sample first selected countries based on previously accepted country-toselection? (3) Was the sample size
country cooperation. Further selection of the hospitals and units were based on
adequate? Was there a power analysis opportunity, juxtaposition to the other sites, and convenience. Lastly, the
done? (3)
patient sample selection included planned or emergent surgical patients
Quantitative Critique Rubric 5.25.2020
Points
achieved
What evidence was provided that biases
were eliminated or minimized? What
steps were taken to control confounding
participant characteristics that could
affect the equivalence of groups being
compared? Were these steps adequate?
(6)
What were the inclusion and
exclusion criteria? (3)
Describe the instruments used- were
they reliable/valid? Is this addressed?
(3)
Procedures (6)
Describe how the data was collectedwas it consistent? (3)
Were the dependent variables always
obtained in the same manner? (3)
Analysis (32)
What type of analysis was done?
Identify the statistics used-were they
appropriate for level of measurement?
All assumptions met? (5) Was
Quantitative Critique Rubric 5.25.2020
admitted within 48 hours following their procedure. Yes, power analysis
revealed a total of 223 participants from each country would be needed. A total
of 1,565 questionnaires were obtained for analysis, adequate sample size
Because this is a non-experimental study it is difficult to control biases. The
authors note the survey was done at different countries, and varied from the
whole country to just specific areas in countries. Also the patients were very
heterogenous (not alike) in terms of the hospitalizations, LOS, demographics.
The authors state that they did use the same inclusion and exclusion criteria,
and had consistency in the data gathering process. They also had a
communication network to address issues. It is about as good as you can get
with considering the countries themselves were different with varying policies
and no randomization.
Inclusion: patients who had successfully completed, and delivered the
questionnaire they had been presented during their admission; no exclusion
criteria identified
Caring Behaviors Inventory 24-Item version (CBI-24), and the Patient
Satisfaction Scale (PSS). CBI-24 was based on Watson ‘s Transpersonal Caring
Theory, no discussion of reliability or validity. PSS had Cronbach alpha of
0.841-0.906.
The questionnaires were distributed 48 hours post-operatively, in the in-patient
setting, prior to discharge, and all sealed questionnaires were collected by
designated members of the study. The data collection process remained
consistent throughout the study by incorporating a point person for each
country, consistent education in the appropriate language, and a uniform
method of questionnaire collection.
The dependent variable of patient satisfaction was obtained in the same manner
using the same instrument (PSS), translated into the corresponding countries
language. Each country had a designated project leader educated on the
distribution, and collection of the questionnaires
Chi-Square test to analyze the demographic differences of participants between
countries: appropriate since demographics are nominal data. Pearson
correlation and regression analyzed the relationships b/w variables- ie to
calculate the coefficients between the total CBI-24 and PSS factor scores. While
rationale provided for use of
statistical tests?
Was analysis appropriate for the
design/methods used? (3)
Were the relevant sample
demographics described? (3) Were
they used to answer RQ when
inferential statistics would have been
more appropriate? (3)
What were the results of the study? (3)
Were any results significant? What
do the tests tell about the RQ or
hypotheses? (3) Were any tests nonsignificant? Is it plausible that these
reflect a Type II error? (3) What
factors might have undermined the
study’s statistical conclusion
validity? (3)
Was an appropriate amount of statistical
information reported? Are the findings
clearly and logically organized? (3) Were
tables or figures used to summarize large
amounts of statistical information? (3)
What was the researcher’s
interpretation of the results? (3)
Quantitative Critique Rubric 5.25.2020
statisticians do not agree on the use of ordinal data (i.e. Likert scales) with correlation,
it is frequently seen in published research. Polit states on p. 358 that the use of the
total score of Likert scales is appropriate, particularly since there are not many errors
caused when treating them as interval data. The dependent variable should be
measured at the interval level- so the same comment above applies to the
regression analysis, to predict which of the CBI-24 factors had an impact on the
dependent variable. The tests were described for each analysis- they did not
specifically identify the LOM but it is inferred as they were appropriate based
on the questions they were asking .
Yes, appropriate analysis used.
51.2% of participants were female, average age of 54.4 years, most participants
having a secondary level education, and an average length of hospital stay
being 9.7 days. The researchers found a significant difference between the
demographics of the countries studied (p