Step-by-step guide to critiquingresearch. Part 2: quaiitative researcii

Frances Ryan, Michael Coughlan, Patricia Cronin

Al>stractAs with a quantitative study, critical analysis of a qualitative studyinvolves an in-depth review of how each step of the research wasundertaken. Qualitative and quantitative studies are, however,fundamentally different approaches to research and thereforeneed to be considered differently with regard to critiquing. Thedifferent philosophical underpinnings of the various qualitativeresearch methods generate discrete ways of reasoning and distinctterminology; however, there are also many similarities within thesemethods. Because of this and its subjective nature, qualitative researchit is often regarded as more difficult to critique. Nevertheless, anevidenced-based profession such as nursing cannot accept research atface value, and nurses need to be able to determine the strengths andlimitations of qualitative as well as quantitative research studies whenreviewing the available literature on a topic.

Key words: Critical appraisal • Qualitative research

and quantitative studies are flnidanientally(difFercnc approaches to research and thereforeneed to be approached differently with regard to

g. Qualitative research is essentially anassortment of various approaches that have commonalities aswell as differences (Parahoo, 2006).The difierent philosophicalunderpinnings of the various qualitative research methodsgenerate discrete ways of reasoning and distinct terminology;however, there are many similarities within these methods(Burns and Grove, 1999) that can be categorized together.

Qualitative research docs not regard truth as objective,but as a subjective reality that is experienced differently byeach individual (Vishnevsky and Beanlands, 2004), Nor doproponents of qualitative research believe that a phenomenoncan be isolated into multiple variables that can be studiedindependently. Qualitative research asserts that a phenomenonis more than the sum of its parts, and must therefore be studiedin a holistic manner. As a result, the purpose of this paradigmis not to attempt to generalize data to the population but to

Frances [lyan, Michael Coughlan, Patricia Cronin are Lecturers,School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Dublin,TrinityCoilege, Dublin

Accepted for publication: March 2007

explore individuals' experiences (Vishnevsky and Beanlands.2004) and in sonic instances the development of new theory.

Elements Influencing beltevabillty of the studyThe elements mtlucncmg bclicvability can help the readerto focus on what to expect from a piece of research byasking questions regarding the researcher's academic andprofessional qualifications and the skills demonstrated inpresenting the study (Ryan-Wenger, 1992).These questionsare similar to those asked when critiquing a quantitativestudy and were discussed in part I of this article (Coughlanet al, 2007). Questions relating to these elements arepresented in Tcihic I.

Elements influencing robustness of the studyStatement of the phenomenon of interestMany ot the topics examined in research studies are of anabstract nature in that the particular experience may beinterpreted differently by another individual, or by the sameindividual under different circumstances, e.g. when in pain. Inqualitative research these abstract encounters or experiencesare known as phenomena (Polit and Beck, 2006).The topicbeing studied should be clearly identified by the researcher(Connell Meehan, 1999).

Purpose/significance of the studyThe researcher should explain next why the study needsto be undertaken and what he/she expects to glean from it.The researcher should also state why the study will be ofsignificance and how it will add to the general body ofinformation on the phenomenon (Connell Meehan, 1999).At this stage the researcher should also justify the use of aqualitative approach and the qualitative methodology to beused (Connell Meehan, 1999).

Literature reviewThe function of a literature review in research smdies is toprovide an objective account of what has been written on agiven subject.This in turn should reflect prominent emergingthemes and inform the conceptual framework of the study.

Qualitative research follows the naturalistic paradigmbased on the assumption that multiple realities exist and suchrealities are constructed by the research participants. It aimsto explore the phenomenon in question by focusing on theindividuals who experience it (Vishnevsky and Beanlands,2004). Qualitative methods are concerned with experiences,feelings and attitudes, as opposed to precise measurementand statistical analysis. Qualitative methodologies vary

738 British Journal of Nursing. 20(17.Vol Ui. No 12

RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES

Table 1. Research questions: guidelines for critiquing a qualitative research study

Elements Influencing believabllity of the research

E.lement5 QuestionsWriting style Is the report well written - concise, grammatically correct, avoids the use of jargon?

Is it well laid out and organized?

Author

Report title

Abstract

Do the researcher's qualifications/position indicate a degree of knowledge in this field?

Is the title clear, accurate and unambiguous?

Does the abstract offer a dear overview of the study, including the research problem, sample,methodology, findings and recommendations?

Elements Infiuencing robustness of the research

Eiements QuestionsStatement of the Is the phenomenon to be studied dearly identified?phenomenon of interest Are the phenomenon of interest and the research question consistent?

Purpose/significance ofthe study

Literature review

Theoretical framework

Method and philosophicalunderpinnings

Sample

Ethical considerations

Data col lection/data analysis

Rigour

Fi ndi ngs/discussion

Conclusions/implications andrecommendations

References

Is the purpose ofthe study/research question deariy identified?

Has a literature review been undertaken?Does it meet the philosophical underpinnings of the study?Does the review of the literature fuifli its objectives?

Ha5 a conceptual or theoretical Framework been identified?Is the framework adequately described?Is the framework appropriate?

Has the phiiosophical approach been identified?Why was this approach chosen?Have the philosophical underpinnings of the approach been explained?

Is the sampling method and sample size identified?Is the sampling method appropriate?Were the participants suitable for informing research?

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 ethicai permission granted for the study?

Are the data collection strategies described?Are the strategies used to analyse the data described?Did the researcher tbilow the steps of the data analysis method identitied?Was data saturation achieved?

Does the researcher dtscuss how rigour was assured?Were credibility, dependability, transferability and goodness discussed?

Are the findings presented appropriateiy?Hcis the report been placed in the context of what was already known of the phenomenon?Has the original purpose of the study been adequately addressed?

Are the importance and implications of the findings identified?Are recommendations made to suggest how the research findings can be developed?

Were all the books, journals and other media alluded to in the study accurately referenced?

regarding the inclusion of a literature review before the datacollection period. Similarly, there is debate over whether theconceptual framework should precede the period of datacollection and data analysis.

When critiquing qualitative studies, the reviewer mustdecide whether the researcher has rationalized his/her chosenapproach. A major premise of grounded theory, for example,is that data are collected in isolation from any predetermined

theory or conceptual framework. The literature review istherefore carried out after the data have been collected. Theaim of this approach is to explore concepts embedded in thedata, thereby allowing theory to be generated from the datarather than vice versa (Robinson, 2002).

Similarly, in phenomenological investigations the literaturereview may be delayed until the data analysis is complete.This ensures that the fmdings reflect participants' experiences

Uririshjiiunijl fit'Nursing. 2(HI7.Viil Hi. No 13 739

and are truly grounded in the data. This is congruent withthe philosophical orientation of phenoi-nenology, whichviews the subjective experience of participants as central tothe methodology (Burns and Grove, 2001). The conceptualframeworks or themes that emerge from the study maythen be supported by evidence gleaned from a subsequentexamination of the literature.

The ethnographic approach attempts to examine theexperiences of the person in the context of his/hernatural world and explores the topic of study through theperceptions of the subjects of study. The literature review inethnographic studies is used to demonstrate knowledge ofprevious work in the area, as well as frameworks used in theanalysis of data.

According to Meadows (2003), existing literature providesboth the basis for research and the context for interpretingfindings. When critiquing qualitative research studies it isnecessary to appraise the literature review in the contextof the particular methodology used, if the literature reviewis appropriate only after the period of data collection, thenthe researcher needs to identify how this process is to beachieved and in what way the literature is going to be used todetermine similarities with or differences from the researchfindings. Conversely, if the literature review is carried outbefore data collection and analysis, then it is required to

Table 2. Characteristics of qualitative research

Truth

Purpose

Context

Emphasis

Approach

Relationship between

TTiere are multiple truths - generalization is not sought

Concerned with discovery and description aithoughverification is aiso possible

There is attention to the social context in which eventsoccur and have meaning

There is an emphasis on understanding the social worldfrom the point oF view of the participants in the study- an emic perspective

The approach is primarily inductive

There is integration between researcher andresearcher and participant participant - interaction is valued

Sample

Data

Data coiiection

Analysis

Rigour

Usually small in number but consists of those who areable and willing to describe the experience

Elicits 'soft data', i.e. words

The major data collection techniques includeinterviewing, participant observation, examination ofpersonal documents and other printed materials

Procedures and tools ibr data gathering are subject toongoing revision in the field situation

Analysis is presented for the most part in a narrativerather than numericai Form, but the inclusion of somequantitative measures and numerical expressions Isnot precluded in qualitative research

Credibility, transferabiiity (fittingness), dependability.confirmability. goodness

provide a comprehensive and balanced account of previouswork, identifying, where appropriate, the relevant themes.conceptual models and theoretical frameworks that providea sound background to the research.

Research questionIn qualitative research, a research question that reflects theidentified phenomenon of interest is used to direct thecourse of the research. A research hypothesis is never usedin qualitative research, unlike quantitative research (ConnellMeehan, 1999). Depending on the qualitative approachadopted, e.g. grounded theory, the research question maybe modified as new data bring new direction to thephenomenon of interest. Such modifications should beexplained and justified by the researcher when they occur.

Theoretical frameworkMany qualitative studies are described as inductive/atheoreticalor theory-generating research. This means that the purposeof the study is to develop theory not test it. Therefore, theresearcher does not use an existing or known theory to directthe study.This approach, which is heavily based on the workof Glaser and Strauss (1967), is known as grounded theory.Ethnography and phenomenology are also classed as theorygenerating. It is important that the researcher indicates thisin the study and justifies the adoption of such a stance, e.g.where little is known about the phenomenon under study orwhere existing theories do not seem to provide the answer(Cronin and Rawlings-Anderson, 2004).

Some qualitative studies use known theories to 'frame'their studies {McKenna, 1997). This provides boundaries orparameters for the study and guides all stages, including theliterature review, data collection, analysis and presentation oftlndings (Parahoo, 2006).

An important point for quahtative descriptive/exploratoryresearch is that there are some limits or boundaries towhat is being studied. For example, if the researcherwished to study an aspect of patients' postoperative painit would be critical to establish how the particular focuswas determined. This is sometimes done by exploring theliterature and identifying the main themes or concepts,which are then used to focus data collection and/or dataanalysis and presentation of the findings.

Methodology: research designDesign in qualitative researcii incorporates a range ofapproaches within what is often referred to as thenaturalistic, interpretive or constructivist world view. Theimportant point here is that such a view of the worldincorporates a set of beliefs about knowledge and howthis knowledge is developed. Qualitative research thereforecomprises a set of characteristics that reflect this world view{Table 2). However, it is also important to note that themain qualitative approaches do differ in their disciplinaryor philosophical origins, hence the focus and manner inwhich they undertake sampHng, data collection and analysiswill vary (Table 3). For the reviewer it is essential that theresearcher outlines and justifies the chosen approach inorder to establish coherence and congruence.

740 British Journa] of Nursing, 2t)O7. Vol !6, No 12

RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES

Table 3. Approaches In qualitative research

Phenomenology/

Origin

Aims

Sample

collection

Dataanalysis

Findings

Generic qualitative research

Broad term for all qualitativeresearch and may have its originsin any of the other disciplines

Description of the issue understudy

Purposive/convenience

Interviews often semi-structured

Generic data analysis tools.e.g. Miles and Huberman (1994)

Description of the phenomenonunder study

Grounded theory

Symbolic interactionismand sociai sciences

Generation of theory from the dataModification/extension of existingtheory

Initial sampling of people abie to giveinformation on the topic. This is foliowedby theoreticai sampiing where furthersampling is guided by the analysis andemerging theory

Interviews, participant observation,diaries and other documents.researcher's own experience

Constant, comparative analysis - datacollection and analysis are linked fromthe beginning of the research

Description of the emergent theory,incorporating the culturai processesand meanings

hermeneutks

Various schools ofphiiosophy

Description/interpretation/understanding/meaning ofthe lived experience/phenomenon under study

Purposive

Unstructured, formal.multiple interviews.written texts, e.g. diaries

Data analysis tools varydepending on school ofphilosophy adopted

Description/interpretationof the phenomenon understudy

Ethnography

Cuiturai anthropoiogy

Direct description of agroup, culture or community

Purposive, non-probability.criterion-based

Observation, interviews andexamination of documents inthe field

Description, analysis andinterpretation of the culture

The culture as experienced byits members is presented

Sampling111 qiiiilitLitive research, participants are usually recruited toa study because of their exposure to or their experienceof the phenoriienon in question. This type of sample tendsto ensure richness in the data gathered and is known aspurposive or purposeful sampling (Fossey et al, 2002).Samples can also be selected as a result of themes thatemerge from the data analysis. The researcher can thenexplore these themes in more depth and/or develop atheory from these data. Tbis type of sampling is known astheoretical sampling (Fossey et al. 2002) and is frequentlyused in grounded theory.

Qualitative samples are often small (Fossey et al, 2002)but this is not usually a problem as the researcher is notattempting to generalize the findings. Data gathered fromparticipants build on the information from previous subjectsand tbe accumulated data can offer a significant depth ofinformation on tbe phenomenon. As a result the researchermay discover that no new material is emerging; at tbis point,data gatbering usually stops (Paraboo, 2006).

Ethical considerationsIn qu.ilitative researcb tbe most common tools used fordata collection are interview and participant observation.The participants are therefore known to the researcher andanonymity is not possible.The researcher must therefore assureparticipants that their identities will not be revealed to tbereader and the raw data collected will not be released to anythird party (Parahoo. 2006). Both interviews and obser\'ationsin qualitative research can give rise to ethical dilemmas.

Participants should always have tbe rigbt to give informedconsent regarding tbeir participation in any researcb study.In order to do tbis, participants should be fully aware ofthe purpose of the study, what sort of information is beingsougbt, bow it will be used and tbe implications for tbem ascontributors to the research. This moral principle is knownas autonomy (Beauchamp and Childress, 2001); it alsoimplies that participants have the right to withdraw from theresearch at any time.

In qualitative interviews tbe role of the interviewer isto encourage participants to 'open up' and discuss theirexperiences of the phenomenon. In doing this, participantscan inadvertently discuss personal information that theyhad not planned to reveal, or that may rekindle tragicor uncomfortable experiences related to the topic beingstudied. Process consent involves continually negotiatingwitb participants to ascertain wbetber tbey are comfortablecontinuing with the interview or would prefer to discontinueparticipation (Polit and Beck, 2006) and can be a useful toolin tbese situations. However, discontinuing participationalone can be insufficient to meet tbe principle of non-maleficence, so psychological support sbould be in placeto manage any emotional distress that may result from tbeinterview (Smith, 1992).

In qualitative research, if vulnerable groups are beingasked to contribute to the study, it is important toensure tbat tbeir rights are protected. Ethical committeeor institutional review board approval has to be sougbtbefore the researcb can be undertaken. Tbe role of etbicalcommittees and institutional review boards is to determine

Brimh Journal ofNursiri(;.2IHI7,Vol 16, No 12 741

tbat ethical principles are being adhered to and thatparticipants are protected from potential sources of harm(Burns and Grove, 1999). It is important to note that withinqualitative researcb, ethical issues often arise at differentstages in tbe study and may be discussed when they occurratber than under a specific beading.

Data collectionIn :i qualitative study any number of strategies can beadopted wben collecting data, including tion-numericalquestionnaires with open-ended questions, interviews(semi-structured and unstructured), participant observation,written texts sucb as diaries or emails, and historical orcontemporary documents. Tbe researcher should outlinethe rationale for the chosen method of data collectionand offer sufficient information of the process. If using aparticular approach, such as grounded theory, it should beevident from the discussion that the researcher has adheredto the processes inherent in tbe methodology (7tj/j/f 3).

Interviews are by far the most common method ofdata collection and are mainly either semi-structured orunstructured (Holloway and Wheeler, 2002). If a semi-structured interview format is selected it sbould be evidenthow tbe themes or questions were derived. In unstructuredinterviews the initial opening question should be presentedand clearly linked to the purpose of the study. Interviewsare more frequently conducted face to face, but online ortelephone interviews are also used.They can be undertakenwitb individuals or groups, sucb as focus groups, and can beone-off or multiple. Tbe rationale for each of these decisionsshould be clearly presented.

Altbougb traditionally associated with grounded theory,'data saturation' is often referred to by some qualitativeresearcbers as a point where tbey claim no new informationwill arise from further samphng. Thorne and Darbysbire(2005) suggest tbat some researcbers use the concept ofdata saturation as a convenient stopping point, and it maybe pertinent to assess wbether the study being evaluated,particularly if it is a small-scale descriptive study, could haveachieved this.

Data analysisIn qualitative research tbe process by wbich data analysis isundertaken is fundamental to determining the credibilityof tbe findings. Essentially it involves tbe transformation ofraw data into a final description, narrative, or themes andcategories. There is considerable variation in how tbis isundertaken, depending on the research question and theapproach taken (Visbnevsky and Beanlands, 2004).

Some researcbers use generic data analysis tools whereasothers use less structured and more creative approaches.What is important is that the process is described insufficient detail to enable the reader to judge whether thefinal outcome is rooted in the data generated (Hollowayand Wheeler, 2002). The researcher sbould demonstrateunderstanding of concurrent data collection and analysis,the processes of organizing and retrieving data, as wellas the steps in coding and thematic analysis. In addition,verification strategies, if used, should be presented. Examples

include use of an expert panel or member cbecking(verifying witb participants).

Several computer-assisted packages are available to assisttbe qualitative researcher during analysis, e.g. NUD*1ST(Non-nutnerical Unstructured Data Indexing, Searchingand Theorising), Etbnograph and NVivo (Robson. 2002).Tbere are inberent advantages to tbese packages in termsof bandling large amounts of data and assisting witb codingand organizing tbe material. However, the rationale for bowand wby a particular tool was chosen sbould be evident.

Although data analysis is central to qualitative research, itis often poorly delineated in research publications. Very fewoffer sufficient detail to determine the emergence of thefindings from tbe raw data, with the result that readers areasked to 'accept' what tbey see. According to Thorne andDarbyshire (2005), the obligation to show the data that ledto tbe fmdings is a reasonable one.

Rigour (trustworthiness)Unlike the quantitative (positivist) paradigm tbat seeks toexamine objective, measurable data and causal relationsliipsbetween variables, qualitative researcb or naturalistic inquiryconcerns itself with processes and meanings that cannotalways be experimentally examined. Socially constructedrealities and relationsbips between the researcher and wbatis being studied are essential components of qualitativeinquiry (Denzin and Lincoln, 2003). Proponents ofqualitative approaches emphasize the value-laden natureof naturalistic inquiry; a commonly heard criticism is thatqualitative research is subjective, anecdotal and subject toresearcber bias (Koch and Harrington, 1998).

Pilkington (2002) suggests that because qualitativemethods are aimed at primarily understanding humanexperiences and ultimately theory development, alternativecriteria are required for ensuring the scientific merit ofqualitative research studies. As quantitative studies areconcerned with the generalizability and reproducibilityof findings, the concepts of reUability and validity areseen as appropriate criteria to use when evaluating tbeadequacy or robustness of quantitative researcb. Tbere ismuch discussion about tbe applicability of validity andreliability to qualitative researcb (Kocb and Harrington,1998; Tobin and Begley, 2004; Hoye and Severinsson,2007).The challenge to alternative paradigms or qualitativeapproaches is to produce plausible, robust researcb and todemonstrate rigour.

Rigour is the means of demonstrating tbe plausibility,credibility and integrity of the qualitative research process.Tbe rigour, or trustwortbiness, of a study may be establishedif the reader is able to audit the actions and developmentsof the researcher (Koch. 2006). According to Burns andGrove (2001), tbe critique of qualitative researcb requires anappraisal of the rigour in documentation, procedural rigour,and ethical rigour:• Rigour in documniuttioti ensures there is a correlation

between tbe steps of tbe research process and the study inquestion, commencing with the phenomenon of interestand following through to the recommendations andimplications for practice.

742 Britishjounial of Nursing. 21MJ7, Vol 16, No 12

RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES

• Procedural rigour refers to appropriate and precise datacollection techniques and incorporates a reflective/criticalcomponent in order to reduce bias and misinterpretations.

• Ethical rigour describes bow confidentiality issues and tberigbts of participants are dealt with during the researcbprocess.The most common criteria used to evaluate qualitative

research studies are credibility, dependability, transferabilit 'and confirmability (Table 2). Other terms such as goodness.md fruitflilness may also be used (Lincoln and Guba, 1985).rbe researcber needs to identify tbe criteria used and tbereader sbould be able to clearly follow each step of tberesearch process:• Crcdiliillty refers to the fiiithflilness to the description of tbe

phenomenon in question (Koch and Harrington, 1998). Itaddresses the issue of whether there is consistency betweenthe participants' views and the researcher's representationof tbem. Koch (2006), asserts tbat credibility may beenhanced by the researcher describing and interpretinghis/her experiences as researcber, and also by consultingwitb participants and allowing them to read and discuss tberesearcb findings. Credibility may also be demonstrated byprolonged engagement, observation and audit trails.

• DcpaulabiUt)' (auditability) is an integral component ofrigour and involves the researcber giving the readersufficient information to determine how dependable tbestudy and the researcher are. A study may be deemedauditable wben another researcher can clearly follow thetrail used by the investigator and potentially arrive at tbesame or comparable conclusions. A research study maybe shown to be dependable by producing evidence of adecision trail at eacb stage of the research process.Accordingto Koch (2006), tbis provides the reader witb evidence ofthe decisions and choices made regarding theoretical andmethodological issues throughout the study and entailsdiscussing explicitly tbe reasons for such decisions. It is alsonecessary for each stage of the research to be traceable andclearly documented.

• Transferabiiity (fittingness) refers to wbetber or not findingscan be applied outside tbe context of the study situation.When critiquing qualitative research, a study can bedeemed to have met the criterion of transferabiiity wbenthe findings can 'fit' into other contexts and readers canapply the findings to their own experiences. Transferabiiityis also enhanced when the results are meaningful toindividuals not involved in tbe research study.

• Confirmability requires the researcber to demonstrate howconclusions and interpretations have been reacbed. It isconcerned with establishing tbat findings are clearly derivedfrom tbe data (Tobin and Begley, 2004). Confirmability isusually establisbed when credibility, transferabiiity anddependability are achieved.

• Goodness is another criterion against which thetrustworthiness and authenticity of qualitative researchcan be measured. When critiquing tbe rigour of qualitativestudies the issue of goodness may be seen as an integralcomponent of the research process and an indicator of therobustness of the study. Tobin and Begley (2004) suggesttbat goodness is an overarching principle of qualitative

inquiry and must be reflected in the entire study. Goodnessneeds to be evident in the philosophical background andstudy design, providing explicit explanations regardingtbe study context, data collection and management andtbe interpretation and presentation process. Goodness,tberefore, is a principle that sbould be present duringall stages of the research study and explicit in tbe finalwritten report.

Findings and discussionAs stated above, findings from qualitative studies can berepresented as a narrative (story), themes, description oftbe phenomenon under study or an interpretive accountof the understanding or meaning of an experience.Regardless of how the final outcome is presented, theresearcber sbould discuss tbe findings in the context ofwhat is already known.

For many this will involve further literature review relatedto the final outcome. However, the reviewer should bewareof exaggerated claims as to the significance of the researchand implications for practice, and further researcb sbouldbe located in tbe study's findings. Moreover, tbe researcbersbould relate the findings of the study back to the originalresearch purpose, and illustrate whether or not it has beenadequately addressed (Thorne and Darbysbire, 2005).

Conclusions, implications and recommendationsThe researcher sbould conclude by placing tbe findingsin a context tbat indicates bow tbis new information is ofinterest, and its impHcations for nursing. These conclusionssbould reflect tbe study's fmdings and ideally sbould offerrecommendations as to how tbey may be developed.

ReferencesAn accurate list of all the books, journal articles, reports andotber media referred to in the study sbould be included in areference list at the end of tbe study (Polit and Beck, 2006).For tbe reader who has an interest in the topic that wasstudied, the reference list can be a good source of furtberreading.

ConclusionAs witb a quantitative study, critical analysis of a qualitativestudy involves an in-deptb review of how each step of theresearch was undertaken. Because of tbe subjective nature ofqualitative research it is often regarded as more difficult tocritique. However, an evidenced-based profession cannotaccept any researcb at face value and needs to be able todetermine the strengths and limitations of studies whenreviewijig the available literature on a topic. DH

Beauchamp T. Childress J (2001) Prindples of Biomedical Ethia. 5&t edn. OxfordUniveniry Press, Oxford

Burns N. CImvfS (1999) UndeKtufiding Nursing Research. 2nd edn.V/Xi Sauiidcrs,Fhihdi'lphia

burns N. C;R>VC S (2001) Hie Practke of Nursing Research: Condutt, Critique mid(:(ilis,uioii. WB Saundcrs. Philadelphia

Coimeli Meehan T (1999) The research critique. In: Treaty I Hyde A (eds)Nursing Research and Design. U C D Press, Dublin: 57-74

Britishjournal of Nursing, 2007.Vol 16, No 12 743

Coiighlaii M, Cronin P, Ryaii F (20<)7) Sccp-by-scop guide Co criciquingmascarch. Part 1: quantitative research. BrJ Nun 16(11): 658-63

Cronin i* Rawlin^-Anderson K (2004) Knowledge Joi Contemporary Ntii'siii^l^iictia: Mosby, E d i n b u i ^

Denzin N, Liiitolii Y (eds) (2003) Strategies of QtuiUiaiiiv /ii.juiry. 2iid edn. Sage,Thousand Oaks, CA

Fossey E, Harvey C, McDermott F, Davidson L (2002} Understanding andevaluating qualitative ri'scarch, Atisi .\' ZJ Psychiairy i6(6): 7\7-?i2

('ila.ser B, Strauss A (1967) Tfu- Disioivr)- of Gnmntkd Iheory: StraTcgies forQtialitiiliiv tiescarcb. Aldine, Chicago

KEY POINTS

[Qualitative and quantitative studies are fundamentally different approaches

to research and therefore need to be approached differently with regard to

critiquing.

I Despite differences in philosophies and terminology, the various qualitative

methods have many similarities that can be categorized together.

I Phenomena are not simply a number of different variables that can bestudied independently: they are more complex than the sum of their partsand should be studied holistically.

I Qualitative studies are perceived as being more difficult to critically evaluatethan quantitative studies: nevertheless, nurses need to be able to critiquequalitative research in order to identify best practice.

Holloway I, Wheeler S (2002) QmliUiInv Rcseiinli in Nursing. 2nd edn.Blackwdl, Oxfod

Hoye S, Severinsson E (2007) Methodological aspects of rigor in qu.-ilic.icivenursing reseaa^h on families involved in intensive care units: i literaturereview. Nurs Hccilth .Sd 9(t): 61-8

Koch T (2l)0d) Establishing rigour in qualitative research: the decision trail.

JKoch T, Harrington A (1998) Reconceptualising rigour: the case for rcflcxivity.

J Adi' Wm 28(4); SaZ-WLiiicolii Y, Cuba E (1985) Nainrnlisik /nijiiir)'. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAMcKeinia H (1997) NursingTIwories ami Modeh. Roudedge,LondonMeadows K (2( '03) So you want to do research 1: an overview of the research

process, BrJ Commtitiity Nurs 8(8): 369-75Miles M. Hiibcrnun A (1994) Qualilaliif Data Aiiiilyih. 2nd edn. Sage,

Tiiousand Oak-s. CAParahoo K (2006) Nuning Research: Priiidples, Process and Issues. 2nd edn.

Palgrave Macniillan, Houndniills, Ba.sii)^tokePilkington F (2002) Scientific mtrrit and research ethics. Nun Sd Q 15(3):

196-200Polit D, Deck C (2006) Essttitiah oJ NuTsing Care: Mfthods. Appnii.wl <iiid

Ihili2:ation. 6th edn. Lippiiicott Williams and Wilkins, PhiladelphiaRobinson J (2002) Choosing your methods. In; TarUng M, C'rofts L (fds) Vie

E^sciuial Researcher's Hatidbook for Nurses and Health CaK Jhojasiionah. 2ndfdii. Balliere TinAJl, Edinburgh: 64—81

Robson C (2(.HI2) RciJ Worhi Reseanh. 2nd edn. BlackweU, OxfordRyan-Wcngcr N (1992) Guidelines for critique of a research R'port. Heart

Smith L (1992) Ethical issues in interviewing.J/lt/i ',VHR 17(1): 98-103Thorne S, Darbyshire 1' (2005) Land inini-s in the field: a modi^st proposal for

iinptoving the craft of qualitative health research. Qii.i/ Health Res 15(8):1105-13

Tobin G, Begley C (2004) Methodological rigour within a qualitativeframework./.4 Ji' Nurs 48(4): 388-96

Vishuevsk) T, Beanlands H (21)04) QualiDtivc research. Nepbrol \hirs j 31(2):234-8

CritiquingNursing Research

2nd edition

ISBN-W: 1- 85642-316-6: tSBN-13: 978-1-85642-316-8: 234 x 156 mm:p/back: 224 pages:publication November 2006: £25.99

By John R Cutcliffe and Martin Ward

This 2nd edition of Critiquing Nursing Research retains the features which made the originala 'best seller' whilst incorporating new material in order to expand the book's applicability. Inaddition to reviewing and subsequently updating the material of the original text, the authorshave added two further examples of approaches to crtitique along with examples and anadditonal chapter on how to critique research as part of the work of preparing a dissertation.

The fundamentals of the book however remain the same. It focuses specifically on critiquingnursing research; the increasing requirement for nurses to become conversant with research,understand its link with the use of evidence to underpin practice; and the movement towardsbecoming an evidence-based discipline.

As nurse education around the world increasingly moves towards an all-graduate discipline, itis vital for nurses to have the ability to critique research in order to benefit practice. This bookis the perfect tool for those seeking to gain or develop precisely that skill and is a must-havefor all students nurses, teachers and academics.

John Cutcliffe rto/ds the 'David G. Braithwaite' Protessor ot Nursing Endowed Chair at the University of Texas (Tyler): tie isalso an Adjunct Professor of Psychiatric Nursing at Stenberg College International School of Nursihg, Vancouver, Canada.

Matin Ward is an Independent Mental Health Nurse Consultant and Director of MW Professional Development Ltd.

To order your copy please contact us using the details below or visit our websitewww.quaybooks.co.uk where you will also find details of other Quay Books offers and titles.

John Cutcliffe and Martin Ward

QUAYBOOKS

Quay Books Division I MA Healthcare LimitedJesses Farm i Snow Hill I Dinton I Salisbury I Wiltshire I SP3 5HN I UK

Tel: 01722 716998 I Fax: 01722 716887 I E-mail: info@quaybooks.co.uk I Web: www.quaybooks.co.uk

X\AH

MA NUUHGUa LJMirCD

744 lirimlijournalof NursiiiB,2(MJ7,VoI U.. No 12