Research Project

g3freeme40
Week5-Project.docx

Week 5-Project

Research Report for the Critique (Click on DOI URL)

Uslu, E. & Buldukoglu,K. (2020). Randomized controlled trial of the effects of nursing care based on a telephone intervention for medication adherence in schizophrenia. Perspectives in Psychiatric Care, 56, 63-71.  http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ppc.12376  (Links to an external site.)  

 Follow the rubric in order to write your paper and use the rubric headings to guide your paper's organization and critique.

· Assignment is run through Turnitin before submitting it for a grade.  There should be no evidence of similarity (plagiarism) in this assignment.  Faculty will review the Turnitin Report when grading the assignment.

· Using the criteria sections as headings, respond to the following questions providing the rationale or citing examples or content from the study you read. Yes/No answers are not acceptable.  No direct quotes are permitted.

· formatting in APA 7th edition format (including references).

Research Critique 2024

Research Critique 2024

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProblem & Purpose

The paper clearly and completely identifies the problem and purpose of the study.

4 pts

Excellent

The paper clearly and completely identifies the problem and purpose of the study.

3 pts

Proficient

The problem and purpose of the study are mostly well defined.

2 pts

Marginal

The problem and purpose of the study are incompletely defined.

1 pts

Weak

The problem and purpose of the study are poorly defined.

0 pts

Not Met

Problem and purpose missing

4 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLiterature Review

The critique provides a thorough literature review including critical evaluation of the references used in the study, including the currency, relevance, and completeness of theories and models discussed.

5 pts

Excellent

The critique provides a thorough literature review including critical evaluation of the references used in the study, including the currency, relevance, and completeness of theories and models discussed.

4 pts

Proficient

The literature review is mostly complete and accurate.

3 pts

Marginal

The literature review is incomplete or lacking accuracy.

2 pts

Weak

The literature review is significantly incomplete or inaccurate.

0 pts

Not Met

The literature review is missing.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFramework

The literature review thoroughly and critically evaluates the framework discussion and map or model of the framework in the study, including how explicitly it is presented, relevance to the nursing body of knowledge, links to models, theories, concepts of interest and variables in the study.

5 pts

Excellent

The literature review thoroughly and critically evaluates the framework discussion and map or model of the framework in the study, including how explicitly it is presented, relevance to the nursing body of knowledge, links to models, theories, concepts of interest and variables in the study.

3 pts

Proficient

The framework evaluation is mostly complete and accurate.

2 pts

Marginal

The framework evaluation is incomplete or lacking accuracy.

1 pts

Weak

The framework evaluation is significantly incomplete or inaccurate.

0 pts

Not Met

The framework evaluation is missing.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeResearch Objectives

The critique accurately and thoroughly evaluates how well the research objectives, questions, or hypotheses direct the conduct of the study.

5 pts

Excellent

The critique accurately and thoroughly evaluates how well the research objectives, questions, or hypotheses direct the conduct of the study.

3 pts

Proficient

The evaluation of reseearch objectives, questions, or hypotheses is mostly complete and accurate.

2 pts

Marginal

The evaluation of reseearch objectives, questions, or hypotheses is incomplete or lacking accuracy.

1 pts

Weak

The evaluation of research objectives, questions, or hypotheses is significantly incomplete or inaccurate.

0 pts

Not Met

Research objectives, questions, or hypotheses missing.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeVariables

All variables are clearly and accurately identified and defined (conceptually and operationally), including all of the following as applicable: independent, dependent, research, and attribute/demographic variables.

8 pts

Excellent

All variables are clearly and accurately identified and defined (conceptually and operationally), including all of the following as applicable: independent, dependent, research, and attribute/demographic variables.

7 pts

Proficient

The identification of variables is mostly complete and accurate.

6 pts

Marginal

The identification of variables is incomplete or lacking accuracy.

5 pts

Weak

The identification of variables is significantly incomplete or inaccurate.

0 pts

Not Met

Variables are missing

8 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeResearch Design

The research design is thoroughly and accurately critiqued, with clear discussion of the treatment or intervention, subject grouping, extraneous variables, and pilot study findings.

10 pts

Excellent

The research design is thoroughly and accurately critiqued, with clear discussion of the treatment or intervention, subject grouping, extraneous variables, and pilot study findings.

9 pts

Proficient

The critique of the research design is mostly complete and accurate.

8 pts

Marginal

The critique of the research design is incomplete or lacking accuracy.

7 pts

Weak

The critique of the research design is significantly incomplete or inaccurate.

0 pts

Not Met

Critique of research design missing.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSample & Sampling Method

The sample and sampling are thoroughly and accurately critiqued, including inclusion/exclusion criteria, sampling method, sample size and analysis, subject participation, sample characteristics, ethical considerations, and study setting.

8 pts

Excellent

The sample and sampling are thoroughly and accurately critiqued, including inclusion/exclusion criteria, sampling method, sample size and analysis, subject participation, sample characteristics, ethical considerations, and study setting.

7 pts

Proficient

The critique of the sample is mostly complete and accurate.

6 pts

Marginal

The critique of the sample is incomplete or lacking accuracy.

5 pts

Weak

The critique of the sample is significantly incomplete or inaccurate.

0 pts

Not Met

Sample and sampling method not present.

8 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMeasurement Strategy

The measurement strategy and source are clearly and accurately identified, with a detailed description of the type, level, and development of each, as well as a critique of the reliability and validity of instruments used and the precision and accuracy of physiological measurement methods used (if any).

9 pts

Excellent

The measurement strategy and source are clearly and accurately identified, with a detailed description of the type, level, and development of each, as well as a critique of the reliability and validity of instruments used and the precision and accuracy of physiological measurement methods used (if any). Range

8 pts

Proficient

The critique of the measurement methods is mostly complete and accurate.

7 pts

Marginal

The critique of the measurement methods is incomplete or lacking accuracy.

6 pts

Weak

The critique of the measurement methods is significantly incomplete or inaccurate.

0 pts

Not Met

The critique of the measurement methods is missing.

9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStatistical Analysis

The statistical analysis techniques are thoroughly and accurately identified, with an accurately completed table for each technique, and a discussion of the level of significance.

15 pts

Excellent

The statistical analysis techniques are thoroughly and accurately identified, with an accurately completed table for each technique, and a discussion of the level of significance.

13 pts

Proficient

The discussion of statistical analysis is mostly complete and accurate.

11 pts

Marginal

The discussion of statistical analysis is incomplete or lacking accuracy.

8 pts

Weak

The discussion of statistical analysis is significantly incomplete or inaccurate.

0 pts

Not Met

Statistical Analysis Missing

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeInterpretation of Findings

The critique of the interpretation of findings discussed in detail how the results are related to and support (or do not) the study's framework, as well as how the findings compare to expectations and previous findings.

5 pts

Excellent

The critique of the interpretation of findings discussed in detail how the results are related to and support (or do not) the study's framework, as well as how the findings compare to expectations and previous findings.

4 pts

Proficient

The critique of the findings is mostly complete and accurate.

3 pts

Marginal

The critique of the findings is incomplete or lacking accuracy.

2 pts

Weak

The critique of the findings is significantly incomplete or inaccurate.

0 pts

Not Met

Critique of the findings is missing.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLimitations

The discussion of study limitations clearly explains those that were discussed in the publication and provides thoughtful identification of limitations that were not discussed.

4 pts

Excellent

The discussion of study limitations clearly explains those that were discussed in the publication and provides thoughtful identification of limitations that were not discussed.

3 pts

Proficient

The discussion of study limitations is mostly complete and accurate.

2 pts

Marginal

The discussion of study limitations is incomplete or lacking accuracy.

1 pts

Weak

The discussion of study limitations is significantly incomplete or inaccurate.

0 pts

Not Met

Study Limitations are missing.

4 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConclusions

The conclusions of the study are thoroughly and accurately critiqued, with an insightful discussion of how well the conclusions are supported by the findings.

4 pts

Excellent

The conclusions of the study are thoroughly and accurately critiqued, with an insightful discussion of how well the conclusions are supported by the findings.

3 pts

Proficient

The critique of the conclusions is mostly complete and accurate.

2 pts

Marginal

The critique of the conclusions is incomplete or lacking accuracy.

1 pts

Weak

The critique of the conclusions is significantly incomplete or inaccurate.

0 pts

Not Met

Critique of the conclusions is missing.

4 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOverall Analysis

An overall analysis provides a detailed and thoughtful summary of the study's significance, including knowledge added to nursing practice, strengths and weaknesses of the study, credibility, and replicability of findings, and recommendations.

8 pts

Excellent

An overall analysis provides a detailed and thoughtful summary of the study's significance, including knowledge added to nursing practice, strengths and weaknesses of the study, credibility, and replicability of findings, and recommendations.

7 pts

Proficient

The overall analysis is mostly complete and accurate.

6 pts

Marginal

The overall analysis is incomplete or lacking accuracy.

5 pts

Weak

The overall analysis is significantly incomplete or inaccurate.

0 pts

Not Met

Overall analysis is missing.

8 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Communication

The critique uses professional language throughout with virtually no errors in mechanics or grammar.

5 pts

Excellent

The critique uses professional language throughout with virtually no errors in mechanics or grammar.

4 pts

Proficient

The critique uses mostly professional language throughout with few errors in mechanics or grammar.

3 pts

Marginal

The critique uses somewhat professional language with some errors in mechanics or grammar.

2 pts

Weak

The language of the critique is significantly lacking in professionalism and significant errors are present.

0 pts

Not Met

Missing criteria or not submitted

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Formatting

The paper is in correct APA format, including title page, margins, headings and subheadings, intext, and reference page citations. Turnitin Report shows no issues with originality.

5 pts

Excellent

The paper is in correct APA format, including title page, margins, headings and subheadings, intext, and reference page citations. Turnitin Report shows no issues with originality.

4 pts

Proficient

APA formatting is mostly correct. Turnitin Report shows no issues with originality.

3 pts

Marginal

APA formatting has a few errors or omissions. Turnitin Report shows no issues with originality.

2 pts

Weak

APA formatting is significantly incorrect; Turnitin Report contains issues with originality.

0 pts

Not Met

Turnitin Report shows significant issues in originality.

5 pts

Total Points: 100