APA 7TH EDITION (9)

1. Writing Quality

a. Was the writing style of the report clear and concise with relevant terms defined?

2. Title

a. Is the title clearly focused?

b. Does the title include key study variables and population?

c. Does the title indicate the type of study conducted - descriptive, correlational, quasi-experimental, or experimental-and the variables (Gray et al., 2017; Shadish, Cook, & Campbell, 2002?)

3. Authors

a. Do the authors have credentials such as a doctor of philosophy (PhD) that qualified them to conduct the presented study?

b. Do the authors have previous research or clinical experience that qualified them to conduct the presented study?

c. Do any of the authors have conflict of interest related to the study, such as financial interest in the company that produced the intervention implemented in the study?

4. Abstract

a. Was the abstract clearly presented?

b. Does the abstract include purpose, design highlights, sample, intervention (if applicable), and key results?

5. Research Problem

a. Is a problem statement provided? If a problem statement is not provided, can you infer the problem or gap in the literature?

b. Is the problem significant to nursing and clinical practice (Brown, 2018)?

6. Purpose

a. State the purpose of the study.

b. Does the purpose narrow and clarify the focus of the study (Fawcett & Garity, 2009; O'Mathuna & Fineout-Overholt, 2015)?

7. Literature review (see Chapter 6)

a. Examine the literature review

b. Are most references peer- reviewed primary sources? Do the authors justify references that are not peer reviewed primary sources?

c. Are most of the references current (number and percentages of sources published in the last 5 and 10 years)? Are references older than 10 years, measurement or theoretical sources, landmark, seminal or replication studies?

d. Is the content directly related to the study concepts or variables? Are the types of sources and disciplines of the source authors appropriate for the study concepts or variables?

e. Are the studies critically appraised and synthesized (Gray et al. 2017; Hart, 2009)? Is a clear concise summary presented of the current empirical and theoretical knowledge in the area of study including identifying what is known and not known (O'Mathuna & Fineout-Overholt, 2015)? Does the study address a gap in the knowledge identified in the literature review?

8. Framework or theoretical perspective (see Chapter 7)

a. Is the framework explicitly expressed, or must you extract the framework from the introduction, literature review, or other section(s) of the study?

b. Does the framework identify, define and describe the relationships among the concepts of interest? If a model or conceptual map of the framework is present, it is adequate to explain the phenomenon of concern (Gray et al., 2017)?

c. How is the framework related to nursing's body of knowledge (Alligood, 2014; Smith & Lier, 2014)?

d. If a proposition from a theory is to be tested, is the proposition clearly identified and linked to the study hypotheses (Fawcett & Garity, 2009; Smith & Lier, 2014)?

9. Research objectives, questions, or hypotheses (see Chapter 5)

a. List any research objectives, questions, or hypotheses.

b. Are the objectives, questions, or hypotheses clearly expressed and logically linked to the research purpose?

c. Are the objectives, questions, or hypotheses logically liked to the concepts and relationships (propositions) in the framework (Chin & Kramer, 2015; O'Mathuna & Fineout- Overholt, 2015; Smith & Liehr, 2014)?

d. Are hypotheses stated to direct the conduct of quasi-experimental and

experimental research (Shadish et al., 2002)?

10. Variables ( see Chapter 5)

a. Identify the study variables or concepts. Attribute or demographic variables should be provided. A study usually includes independent and dependent variables or research variables, but not all three types of variables.

i. Demographic variables

ii. Independent variables

iii. Dependent variables

iv. Research variables or concepts

b. Identify the conceptual and operational and definitions for independent and dependent variables.

c. Are the variables clearly defined (conceptually and operationally) and based on previous research or theories (Chinn & Kramer, 2015; Gray et al., 2017; Smith & Liehr, 2014)?

d. Are the variables reflective of the concepts identified in the framework?

11. Research design (see Chapter 8)

a. Identify the specific design of the study.

b. Does the design provide a means to examine all the objectives, questions, and hypotheses?

c. Is the design used in the study the most appropriate design to obtain data (Gray et al., 2017)?

d. Treatment

i. Does the study include a treatment or intervention?

ii. Is the treatment clearly described (Eymard & Altmiller, 2016)?

iii. Is the treatment appropriate for examining the study purpose and hypotheses?

iv. Was a protocol developed to promote consistent implementation of the treatment to ensure intervention fidelity (Eymard & Altmiller, 2016)?

v. Did the researcher monitor implementation of the treatment to ensure

consistency?

vi. If the treatment was not consistently implemented, what might be the impact on the findings?

e. Groups

i. Did the study have more than one group?

ii. If the study had more than one group, how were study participants assigned to groups?

iii. If a treatment was implemented, with more than one group, were the participants randomly assigned to groups to the treatment group or were the treatment and comparison groups matched? Were the treatment and comparison groups appropriate for the purpose of the study?

iv. If more than one group was used, did the groups appear equivalent?

f. Were pilot study findings used to design this study? If yes, briefly discuss the pilot and the changes made in this study based on the pilot (Gray et al., 2017; Shadish et al., 2002).

g. Did the researcher identify the threats to design validity (statistical conclusion validity, internal validity, construct validity, and external validity) and minimize them as much as possible (Gray et al., 2017; Shadish et al., 2002)?

12. Sample (See Chapter 9)

a. Is the sampling method probability or nonprobability? Is the specific sampling method used in the study to obtain the sample identified and appropriate (Gray et al., 2017)?

b. What are the sampling inclusion criteria and sampling exclusion criteria, and were both clearly identified and appropriate for the study (O'Mathuna & Fineout- Overholt,2015)?

c. Is the sample size identified (Aberson, 2010)?

d. Is the refusal or acceptance rate identified? Is the sample attrition or retention rate addressed? Are reasons provided for the refusal and attrition rate?

e. Is a power analysis reported? Was the sample size appropriate, as indicated by the power analysis. If groups were included in the study, is the sample size for each group equal and appropriate (Group & Cipher, 2017)?

f. Is the sampling process adequate to achieve a representative sample? Is the

sample representative of the accessible and target populations?

g. Did the researchers define the target and accessible populations for the study?

h. How was informed consent /assent obtained?

i. Was the process used for informed consent /assent appropriate for the study population?

13. Setting (see Chapter 9)

a. What is the study setting?

b. Is the setting appropriate for the study purpose?

14. Measurement (see Chapter 10)

a. Complete Table 12.1 to cover essential measurement content for a study (Waltz, Strickland, & Lenz, 2017)

i. Identify each study variable that was measured.

ii. Identify the name and author of each measurement strategy

iii. Identify the type of each measurement strategy (e.g. Likert scale, visual analog scale, physiological measure, or existing database).

iv. Identify the level of measurement (e.g., nominal, ordinal, interval or ratio) achieved by each measurement method used in the study (Grove & Cipher, 2017).

v. Describe the reliability of each scale for previous study and this study. Identify the precision of each physiological measure (Bialocerkowski, Klupp, & Bragge, 2010; Devon et al., 2007).

vi. Identify the validity of each scale and the accuracy of physiological measures (DeVon et al., 2007; Ryan- Wenger, 2017).

TABLE 12.1 Measurement Strategies

Variable Measured

Name of Measurement Method (author

Type of Measurement Method

Level of Measurement

Reliability or Precision

Validity or Accurac y

b. Scales and questionnaires

i. Are the instruments clearly described?

ii. Are techniques to complete the score the instruments provided?

iii. Did the researcher re- examine the validity and reliability of the instruments for the present sample?

iv. If the instrument was developed for the study, is the instrument development process described (Gray et al., 2017; Waltz et al., 2017).

c. Observation

i. Is what is to be observed clearly identified and defined?

ii. Are the techniques for recording observations described (Waltz et al., 2017)?

iii. Is interrater reliability described?

d. Interviews

i. Do the interview questions address concerns expressed in the research problem?

ii. Are the interview questions relevant for the research purpose, and objectives questions or hypothesis (Gray et al., 2017; Waltz et al., 2017)?

e. Physiological measures

i. Are the physiological measures or instruments clearly described (Ryan- Wenger, 2017)? If appropriate, are the brand names of the instruments identified?

ii. Are the accuracy, precision, and error of the physiological instruments discussed (Ryan-Wenger, 2017)?

iii. Are the psychological measures appropriate for the research purpose and objectives, questions, or hypotheses?

iv. Are the message for recording data from the psychological measures clearly described question mark is the recording of data consistent?

f. Do the measurement methods selected for the study adequately measure the study variables question for the additional measurement methods have been used to improve the quality of the study outcomes (Waltz et al., 2017)?

g. The measurement methods used in the study have adequate validity and reliability? What additional reliability or validity testing is needed to improve the quality of the measurement methods (Bailocerkowski et al., 2010; DeVon et al., 2007; Waltz et al., 2017)?

15. Data collection

a. Is the data collection process clearly described (Fawcett & Garity, 2009; Gray et al. 2017)?

b. Do that data collected address the research objectives, questions, or hypotheses?

c. How did the research ensure that the data collection process was conducted in an accurate and consistent manner?

i. Who collected the study data?

ii. Is the training of data collectors clearly described and adequate?

iii. Were methods of standardization such as standardized forms or computerized data used?

d. Was IRB approval obtained before data collection?

e. Were the data collection methods ethical?

f. Did any adverse events occur during the data collection, and were these appropriately managed?

16. Data analyses

a. Complete table 12.2 with the analysis techniques conducted in the study (Gray et al. 2017; Grove & Cipher, 2017; Hoare and Hoe, 2013; Plichta & Kelvin, 2013).

i. Certified the purpose (description, relationships, or differences) for each analysis technique.

ii. List the statistical analysis technique performed.

iii. List the statistic.

iv. Provide the specific results.

v. Identify the probability (p) of the statistical significance achieved by the result.

TABLE 12.2 Statistical Analyses and Results

Purpose of Analysis

Analysis Technique

Statistic Results Probability (p)

b. Are the data analysis procedures clearly described?

c. Either data analysis techniques address the study purpose and the research objectives, question, or hypotheses (Gray et al., 2017; Grove & Cipher, 2017)?

d. Open data analysis procedures appropriate for the type of data collected (Grove & Cipher, 2017; Plichta & Kelvin, 2013)?

e. Did the researcher address any problem with missing data and explain how this problem was managed?

f. Statistical significance.

i. Was the level of significance or alpha identified? If yes, what was the level of significance (0.05, 0.01, or 0.001)?

ii. Is the sample size sufficient to detect significant differences if they are present?

iii. What is a power analysis conducted for nonsignificant results (Aberson, 2010)?

g. Are the results presented in an understandable way by narrative, tables, figures, or a combination of methods (APA, 2010; Grove & Cipher, 2017)?

h. Are the results interpreted appropriately?

17. Interpretation of findings

a. Are the findings consistent with previous research findings (Grey et al., 2017; O’Mathuna & Fineout-Overholt, 2015)?

b. How far is discussed in relation to each objective, question, or hypothesis?

c. Are various explanations for significant and nonsignificant findings examined?

d. Are the findings clinically important (O’Mathuna & Fineout-Overholt, 2015)?

e. Add the findings linked to the study framework (Smith & Liehr, 2014)? If so, do the findings support the study framework?

f. What questions emerge from the findings, and does the researcher identify

them?

18. Limitations

a. What study limitations did the researcher identify?

b. Does the study have limitations not identified by the researcher?

c. Could the limitations of the study have been prevented or controlled by the researcher?

19. Conclusions

a. What conclusions did the researchers identify based on their interpretation of this study findings?

b. Do the conclusions fit the findings from this study and previous studies?

c. How did the researchers generalize the findings? Did the researcher generalize the findings appropriately?

20. Nursing implications

a. What implications do the findings have for nursing practice (Melnyk et al., 217; O’Mathuna & Fineout-Overholt, 2015)?

b. Were the identified implications for practice appropriate based on the study findings and on the findings from previous research (Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2015)?

21. Future research

a. What suggestions for further study were identified?

b. Were quality suggestions made for future research (O’Mathuna & Fineout- Overholt, 2015)?

c. Is the description of the study sufficiently clear for replication?

d. Did money, commitment, the researcher’s expertise, availability of subjects, facilities, equipment, and slash or ethics make the study unfeasible to conduct (Gray et al., 2017)?

22. Critique summary

a. Review the components of the critique you just conducted. Consider the following to formulate your critique summary.

i. Where all relevant components covered with adequate detail and clarity?

ii. What were the studies greatest strength and greatest weaknesses?

iii. Where the rights of human subjects protected (Creswell, 2014; Gray et al., 2017)?

iv. Do you believe the study findings are valid? How much confidence can be placed in the study findings?

v. Bing evaluation of a research report should also include a final discussion of the quality of the report. This discussion should include an expert opinion of the studies quality and contribution to nursing knowledge and practice (Melnyk et al., 2017; O’Mathuna & Fineout-Overholt, 2015).