Superior Essay Writers | Quantitative Article Critique

Quantitative Article Critique

Please read the following articles:

“The effect of Orem-based self-care education on improving self-care ability of patients undergoing chemotherapy: a randomized clinical trial.”
“The Guide to Critiquing Research: Part 1 – Quantitative Research.”
A critique is a systematic way of objectively reviewing a piece of research to highlight both its strengths and weaknesses, and its applicability to practice. For this assignment, the student will read and critique the assigned Quantitative article by answering the following questions.

Is the report well written – concise, grammatically correct, avoid the use of jargon?
Is it well laid out and organized?
Do the researcher’s qualifications / position indicate a degree of knowledge in this particular field?
Is the title clear, accurate and unambiguous?
Does the abstract offer a clear overview of the study, including the research problem, sample, methodology, finding and recommendations?
Is the purpose of the study/the research problem clearly identified?
Does the research report follow the steps of the research process in a logical manner?
Do these steps naturally flow and are the links clear? Is the review logically organized?
Does it offer a balanced critical analysis of the literature?
Is the majority of the literature of recent origin?
Is it mainly from primary sources and of an empirical nature?
Were a conceptual or theoretical framework identified? Was the framework adequately described?
Is the framework appropriate?
Have aims and objectives, a research question, or hypothesis been identified? If so are they clearly stated? Do they reflect the information presented in the literature review?
Has the target population been clearly identified? How were the sample selected?
Was it a probability or nonprobability sample? Is it of adequate size?
Are the inclusions / exclusions criteria clearly identified?
Were the participants fully informed about the nature of the research? Was the autonomy / confidentiality of the participants guaranteed? Were the participants protected from harm?
Was ethical permission granted for the study?
Are all terms, theories, and concepts mentioned in the study clearly defined?
Is the research design clearly identified?
Was the data gathering instrument described? Is the instrument appropriate? How was the instrument developed?
Were reliability and validity testing undertaken and the results discussed?
Was a pilot study undertaken? What type of data and statistical analysis was undertaken? Was it appropriate? How many of the sample participated?
Significance of the findings? Were the findings linked back to the literature review?
If a hypothesis was identified, was it supported?
Were the strengths and limitations of the study including generalizability discussed?
Were there recommendations made for further research?
Were all the books, journals, and other media alluded in the study accurately referenced?

Sample Solution

regards to the osmosis of pieces into lumps. Mill operator recognizes pieces and lumps of data, the differentiation being that a piece is comprised of various pieces of data. It is fascinating to take note of that while there is a limited ability to recall lumps of data, how much pieces in every one of those lumps can change broadly (Miller, 1956). Anyway it’s anything but a straightforward instance of having the memorable option huge pieces right away, somewhat that as each piece turns out to be more natural, it very well may be acclimatized into a lump, which is then recollected itself. Recoding is the interaction by which individual pieces are ‘recoded’ and allocated to lumps. Consequently the ends that can be drawn from Miller’s unique work is that, while there is an acknowledged breaking point to the quantity of pieces of data that can be put away in prompt (present moment) memory, how much data inside every one of those lumps can be very high, without unfavorably influencing the review of similar number>

GET ANSWER