RESEARCH CRITIQUE
Introduction
According to Taylor (2015), a well-prepared introduction is the first part for the readers to have a better understanding of the background details of the research in the paper. The research paper, The Self-management of longer-term depression: learning from the patient, a qualitative study by Eleni Chambers, Sarah Cook, Anna Thake, Alexis Foster, Sue Shaw, Rebecca Hutten, Glenys Parry and Tom Ricketts includes the majority of this aspects in its introduction though some are not dealt with comprehensively. The work seeks to tackle the following: how patients handle long-haul depression, ways to improve the current services and also look into whether the current standards and conceptions of recovery are helpful.
Additionally, the authors seek to investigate how patient's role in dealing with long-haul depression. In the first paragraph, the authors had successfully set the stage of the entire paper and generate huge attraction to the readers to read the paper. According to Creswell (2013), a well-structured introduction needs to create the interest to attract the readers in the chosen topic. The four types of the literature review are categorized into instrumental, evaluative exploratory and systematic review result (Adam et al, 2007).
The authors of this work aimed to investigate various issues pertaining the topic of long-haul depression and it is considered as the second type which is evaluative. According to Randolph (2009), the essence of conducting a literature review is to demonstrate the knowledge of an author about a specific area of study which the authors of the above-mentioned work did too little. They should have completely exploited this particular section to make the work perfect. However, the authors take credit for there is no element of bias in their work. This is worth commenting of the authors if the work since eliminating bias in any form of work makes the work give more accurate results and thus help meet the purpose of the research.
Methods
In a study, the methods used in the study determine how effective the results obtained are. Therefore, the methods used in the process of the research should be very appropriate so as to help to ensure that results obtained from the research are more accurate. Theory, paradigm, qualitative method and quantitative method are the major concepts used in research methods but a combination of these concepts provides more accurate, credible and comprehensive information to the problem (Creswell, 2013). The authors of this work, however, used only one design which is the non-experimental design which is preferable for real-life situations and the qualitative approach. They should have been more inclusive in their research designs as this would eventually help produce better and more accurate results.
The authors obtained information through sampling though the number of respondents is not stated. The number of respondents is very important in analyzing the results. They should have therefore included the number of respondents in their work so as to ensure that it is used to calculate and analyze the results for more accuracy. They conducted interviews but were not keen to give the constraints considered, for instance, the respondents must have been in mental state sober enough to identify privacy limits. The results for qualitative method needs advanced skills in the management of data collection and text-driven creativity at the time of write up and analysis (Taylor et al, 2015). According to Fowler (2013), every single part of a survey must be detailed to ensure the accuracy, precision, and credibility but the authors have not precisely arranged the various components of their research methodology. I would suggest that the authors give detailed information on the data collection criteria.
Additionally, a questionnaire with clear instructions will let the participants feel more easy to complete (Cohen et al,2013). Thus, a research method with concise description will get a better answer. In order to overcome the bias of the result findings, researchers should create the survey approaches such as coding and data screening though the authors of this particular work have not touched on (Loomis, 2014). The authors of this particular work should have actually included these survey approaches of coding and data screening to make the work even better.
Ethical Aspects
Ethics is the code guiding the manner in which various tasks are carried out. Ethical aspects are evident everywhere and this work exception. The authors in the second paragraph stated various ethical aspects they consider in order to safeguard the privacy of the respondents. Since the respondents are basically patients suffering from psychological conditions which could compromise their responses and decision-making abilities, the authors addressed issues about consent, the comfort of respondents and conducive environment, respect for confidentiality and anonymity and freedom of expression of the respondents. Though the authors haven't acknowledged using any approved process in handling the issues there are no breaches of the ethical code. The code of ethics has been commendably been adhered to.
Adhering to the code of ethics must have contributed to a more efficient, effective and reliable research despite some other issues here and there. If the code of ethics had not been adhered to, then the results of the research would have been negatively affected due to bias. This is because if the code of ethics is not adhered to, then bias pops in.The researchers allowed even room for interruption of an audio recording if the respondent got to a point that they felt uneasy participating in the study.
Results
According to Fisher et al (2016), the results or findings section is a place to presents the collected data to the reader but not a place for discussion of the collected data. The authors of the article divert from topic and fail to the results obtained after their research.
Discussion and Conclusion
There must be a purpose for discussion which is to provide the answers for the questions that are mentioned in the introduction and it must be based on the collected data in the results section (Schwabe et al ,2016). Diverting from the collected data will eventually lead to a wrong discussion. This, It is critically important that the discussion section give proper answers to the questions mentioned in the introduction as well as ensure that it is based on collected data in the results section. However, the authors of this piece of work have hardly discussed any findings regarding the initial problem of how patients manage to live with long-haul depression. They should have ensured that they included this information in their discussion section. It would help find the solution for this particular issue.
Besides that, a well-structured discussion should present the limitations, unexpected findings, weaknesses, discrepancies and interpretations of the finding results (Labani et al, 2017). The authors of the article successfully point out limitations such as encounters with some of the vulnerable groups. Additionally, the authors within this area should also indicate any gaps observed during the study. The authors of this article, point various areas especially on the side of ethical issues such as dealing with people with various vulnerabilities. This is important for the next research which should pay attention to how patients deal with depression and the self-administration measures and with the aforementioned issues the research is bound to be more informed. Additionally, in this future study, it is important for the authors to arrange the work systematically for easier understanding.
References
Cohen, L., Manion, L., and Morrison, K., 2013. Research methods in education. Routledge, pp.269-270.
Creswell, J.W., 2013. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach. Sage publications, p.108.
Davies, M.B., and Hughes, N., 2014. Doing a successful research project: Using qualitative or quantitative methods. Palgrave Macmillan, p.24.
Fisher, J.P., Jansen, J.A., Johnson, P.C. and Mikos, A.G., 2016. Guidelines for writing a research paper for publication. Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. Accessed on, pp.18-10.
Fowler Jr, F.J., 2013. Survey research methods. Sage publications, p.1.
Labani, S., Wadhwa, K. and Asthana, S., 2017. Basic Approach to Data Analysis and Writing of Results and Discussion Sections. MAMC Journal of Medical Sciences, 3(1), p.6.
Schwabe, L., López‐Bendito, G. and Ribeiro, C., 2016. Getting published: how to write a successful neuroscience paper. European Journal of Neuroscience, 43(8), pp.992- 996.
Loomis, J.B., 2014. Strategies for overcoming hypothetical bias in stated preference surveys. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 39(1), pp.34-46.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., and Morrison, K., 2013. Research methods in education. Routledge, pp.269-270.
Taylor, S.J., Bogdan, R. and DeVault, M., 2015. Introduction to qualitative research methods: A guidebook and resource. John Wiley & Sons, p.3.
Jaokvyn4curtis
RESEARCHCRITIQUE1.docx
0
