Assignment week 7 - Achiever Papers

** Please read the complete instructions on attached document and use the attached Template for the analysis**

The Assignment:

Using the “Module 4 | Part 4” section of your Academic Success and Professional Development Plan Template (Attached Document), conduct an analysis of the elements of the research article you identified. Be sure to include the following:

Your topic of interest. – Psychiatry
A correctly formatted APA citation of the article you selected, along with link or search details.
Identify a professional practice use of the theories/concepts presented in the article.
Analysis of the article using the “Research Analysis Matrix” section of the template
Write a 1-paragraph justification stating whether you would recommend this article to inform professional practice.
Write a 2- to      3-paragraph summary that you will add to your Academic Success and      Professional Development Plan that includes the following:
Describe your       approach to identifying and analyzing peer-reviewed research.
Identify at       least two strategies that you would use that you found to be effective in       finding peer-reviewed research.
Identify at       least one resource you intend to use in the future to find peer-reviewed       research.

** AT LEAST 3 REFERENCES**

NURS 6003: Transition to Graduate Study for Nursing

Academic and Professional Success Plan Template

Prepared by:

Week 4 | Part 4: Research Analysis

TOPIC OF INTEREST: PSYCHIATRY

I have identified one topic of interest for further study. I have researched and identified one peer-reviewed research article focused on this topic and have analyzed this article. The results of these efforts are shared below.

Directions: Complete Step 1 by using the table and subsequent space below identify and analyze the research article you have selected. Complete Step 2 by summarizing in 2-3 paragraphs the results of your analysis using the space identified.

Step 1: Research Analysis

Complete the table below

Topic of Interest:

Research Article: Include full citation in APA format, as well as link or search details (such as DOI)

Professional Practice Use:

One or more professional practice uses of the theories/concepts presented in the article

Research Analysis Matrix

Add more rows if necessary

Strengths of the Research

Limitations of the Research

Relevancy to Topic of Interest

Notes

Step 2: Summary of Analysis

Craft a summary (2-3 paragraph) below that includes the following:

· Describe your approach to identifying and analyzing peer-reviewed research

· Identify at least two strategies that you would use that you found to be effective in finding peer-reviewed research

· Identify at least one resource you intend to use in the future to find peer-reviewed research

Academic and Professional Success Plan Template

Prepared by:

NURS 6
00
3
:
Transition to
Graduate Study for Nursing

Academic and Professional Success Plan Template

Prepared by:

NURS 6003: Transition to
Graduate Study for Nursing

Instructi

Assignment

Week # 7

Academic Success

and

Professional Development

Plan Part 4: Research Analysis

Architect Daniel Libeskind is credited with saying “To provide meaningful architecture is not to parody

history, but to articulate it.” The suggestion is that his work does not copy the efforts of others but

relies on it.

Understanding the work of others i

s critically important to new work. Contributions to the nursing body

of knowledge can happen when you are able to analyze and articulate the efforts of previous

research.

Research analysis skills are therefore critical tools for your toolbox.

In this Assi

gnment, you will locate relevant existing

research.

You also will analyze this research

using a tool helpful for analysis.

To Prepare:

Reflect on the

strategies

presented

the Resources this Module’s Learning Resources

support of locating and analyzing research.

Resources from School:

https://www.minnisjournals.com.au/articles/radiographer%20smith%20dec%2009

https://drsaraheaton.wordpress.com/2010/09/29/reading

–

strategies-

differneces

–

between

–

summarizing

-and-

synthesizing/

Use the Walden Library to identify and read one

peer

–

reviewed

research article focused on a

topic in your specialty field that interests you.

Review the article you selected and reflect on the professional pr

actice use of

theories/concepts described by the article.

The Assignment:

Using the “Module 4 | Part 4” section of your

Academic Success and Professional Development

Plan

Template

(Attached Document)

, conduct an analysis of the elements of the resea

rch article you

identified. Be sure to include the following:

Your topic of interest.

–

Psychiatry

A correctly formatted APA citation of the article you selected, along with link or search details.

Identify a professional practice use of the theories/concepts presented

in the article.

Analysis of the article using the “Research Analysis Matrix” section of the template

Write a 1

–

paragraph justification stating whether you would recommend this article to inform

professional practice.

Write a 2

–

to 3

–

paragraph summary that

you will add to your Academic Success and

Professional Development Plan that includes the following:

Describe your approach to identifying and analyzing peer

–

reviewed research.

Identify at least two strategies that you would use that you found to be effec

tive in finding

peer-reviewed research.
·

Identify at least one resource you intend to use in the future to find peer

-reviewed research.

AT LEAST 3 REFERENC

ES**

Instructions
Assignment

Week # 7
:

Academic Success and Professional Development

Plan Part 4: Research Analysis

Architect Daniel Libeskind is credited with saying “To provide meaningful architecture is not to parody
history, but to articulate it.” The suggestion is that his work does not copy the efforts of others but
relies on it.

Understanding the work of others i
s critically important to new work. Contributions to the nursing body
of knowledge can happen when you are able to analyze and articulate the efforts of previous
research. Research analysis skills are therefore critical tools for your toolbox.

In this Assi
gnment, you will locate relevant existing research. You also will analyze this research
using a tool helpful for analysis.

To Prepare:

Reflect on the strategies presented in the Resources this Module’s Learning Resources

in
support of locating and analyzing research.

Resources from School:

https://www.minnisjournals.com.au/articles/radiographer%20smith%20dec%2009

https://drsaraheaton.wordpress.com/2010/09/29/reading
–
strategies
–
differneces
–
between
–
summarizing
–
and
–
synthesizing/

Use the Walden Library to identify and read one peer
–
reviewed research article focused on a
topic in your specialty field that interests you.

Review the article you selected and reflect on the professional pr
actice use of
theories/concepts described by the article.

The Assignment:

Using the “Module 4 | Part 4” section of your

Academic Success and Professional Development Plan
Template

(Attached Document)
, conduct an analysis of the elements of the resea
rch article you
identified. Be sure to include the following:

Your topic of interest.

–

Psychiatry

A correctly formatted APA citation of the article you selected, along with link or search details.

Identify a professional practice use of the theories/concepts presented

in the article.

Analysis of the article using the “Research Analysis Matrix” section of the template

Write a 1
–
paragraph justification stating whether you would recommend this article to inform
professional practice.

Write a 2
–

to 3
–
paragraph summary that

you will add to your Academic Success and
Professional Development Plan that includes the following:

Describe your approach to identifying and analyzing peer
–
reviewed research.

Identify at least two strategies that you would use that you found to be effec
tive in finding
peer
–
reviewed research.

Identify at least one resource you intend to use in the future to find peer
–
reviewed
research.

**
AT LEAST 3 REFERENC
ES**

Instructions Assignment Week # 7:

Academic Success and Professional Development

Plan Part 4: Research Analysis

relies on it.

Understanding the work of others is critically important to new work. Contributions to the nursing body

of knowledge can happen when you are able to analyze and articulate the efforts of previous

research. Research analysis skills are therefore critical tools for your toolbox.

In this Assignment, you will locate relevant existing research. You also will analyze this research

using a tool helpful for analysis.

To Prepare:

 Reflect on the strategies presented in the Resources this Module’s Learning Resources in

support of locating and analyzing research.

Resources from School:

https://www.minnisjournals.com.au/articles/radiographer%20smith%20dec%2009

https://drsaraheaton.wordpress.com/2010/09/29/reading-strategies-differneces-between-

summarizing-and-synthesizing/

 Use the Walden Library to identify and read one peer-reviewed research article focused on a

topic in your specialty field that interests you.

 Review the article you selected and reflect on the professional practice use of

theories/concepts described by the article.



The Assignment:

Using the “Module 4 | Part 4” section of your Academic Success and Professional Development Plan

Template (Attached Document), conduct an analysis of the elements of the research article you

identified. Be sure to include the following:

 Your topic of interest. – Psychiatry

 A correctly formatted APA citation of the article you selected, along with link or search details.

 Identify a professional practice use of the theories/concepts presented in the article.

 Analysis of the article using the “Research Analysis Matrix” section of the template

 Write a 1-paragraph justification stating whether you would recommend this article to inform

professional practice.

 Write a 2- to 3-paragraph summary that you will add to your Academic Success and

Professional Development Plan that includes the following:

o Describe your approach to identifying and analyzing

peer-reviewed research.

o Identify at least two strategies that you would use that you found to be effective in finding

peer-reviewed research.

o Identify at least one resource you intend to use in the future to find peer-reviewed

research.

** AT LEAST 3 REFERENCES**

Introduction
Reading critically and analysing the quality of research litera-

ture are skills that are used in designing valid and reliable research
studies. Consequently, formal postgraduate research training
includes an element of critical appraisal. Undergraduate Medical
Radiation Science programmes also include a component of criti-
cal appraisal, linked to the generic graduate health professional
attribute of “using research findings in clinical practice”1 – evi-
dence based practice. Critical appraisal of research literature is an
essential skill for all members of the health care team, including
diagnostic radiographers, radiation therapists and sonographers,
in order to develop models of evidence based practice that focus
on optimal outcomes. Maintenance and improvement of the qual-
ity and safety of health care demands the measurement of these
outcomes. Hence, there is a further need for clinicians to have
a grasp of research methodologies so that they can design and
implement effective quality assurance programmes using meth-
ods that are both valid and reliable. This paper, therefore, aims
to provide a framework for critical appraisal that is relevant to
medical radiation professionals involved in research, education or
clinical practice.

There is a need to understand the terms “validity” and
“reliability” to appreciate the rationale behind critical appraisal.
Validity can be broadly divided into “construct” (or “internal”)
validity and “external” validity. Construct validity is the degree
to which a study uses methods and measurement techniques that
allow legitimate inferences to be made from the findings – Is the
methodology sound? In fact, construct validity has a number of
types (face validity, criterion validity, concurrent validity and
so on). These are well explained by Trochim on his excellent
web-site,2 as are many other quantitative and qualitative research
concepts. External validity relates to the question of whether,
given the methodology used, it is reasonable to generalise the
findings to other populations or settings. The term reliability, on

Critical appraisal of quantitative and qualitative research literature

Tony Smith

University Department of Rural Health, Faculty of Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales 2300, Australia.
Correspondence tony.smith@hnehealth.nsw.gov.au

Abstract Critical appraisal of research articles can be used to inform the design of new research studies. It can also be
used by clinicians who wish to improve service quality by using the best available evidence to inform their practice. This
paper describes a broad framework of critical appraisal of published research literature that covers both quantitative and
qualitative methodologies.

The aim is the heart of a research study. It should be robust, concisely stated and specify a study factor, outcome
factor(s) and reference population. Quantitative study designs, including sampling methods, can be ranked in order of
the quality of the evidence they produce, with randomised control trials being ranked as level 1. The strength of evidence
from qualitative research studies depends on the degree of rigour used in data collection and analysis, using techniques
like theoretical sampling, triangulation and participant validation. Whatever the study design, it must be appropriate to
address the aim of the study.

In critically appraising all research papers, there is a need to reflect on how well the conclusions flow logically from
the results of the analysis and answer the original research question and how well the research applies to the population
we are interested in.

Short communication

the other hand, refers to the “consistency” or “repeatability” of a
study – Is the study reproducible? Well designed research, with
good reliability, could be repeated at a different time or using a
different population and give comparable results. Like validity,
reliability has a number of types,2 the best known being inter-rater
or inter-observer reliability.

All research is not of equal quality in terms of validity and reli-
ability. When reading a research paper we are justified in reading
critically and questioning the findings, especially whether or not
we should accept the conclusions drawn from the study and adopt
the recommendations. However, being critical is a challenge for
both clinicians and early career researchers, generally because
they assume that the researchers must be more expert than
themselves. There is a tendency to believe that any research study
that has made it into print must be of the highest quality. This is
not universally true. Editors and publishers choose papers for a
variety of reasons. Furthermore, journals also vary in terms of the
quality of the papers they publish and they are rated according to
an impact factor.3 However, even journals with a high impact fac-
tor publish research of dubious quality, again, for various reasons.
The first step in critically appraising a research article, therefore,
is to reflect on the quality of the journal in which it is published.
The second is to examine the track record of the authors in the
particular field of study – Where are they from? What are their
qualifications? Have they published in this field before? A search
of Google Scholar or the Medline database can quickly answer
these questions.

Some excellent resources are available to help develop criti-
cal appraisal skills. Concise, logically structured, analytical
approaches are described by Darzins, et al.4 and by Greenhalgh.5
The latter wrote a series of papers on research methods in the
British Medical Journal – a valuable resource! The critical
appraisal framework described below synthesises the work of
these and other authors.

The Radiographer 2009; 56 (3): 6–10

Australian Institute of Radiography

The Radiographer �

Study aim
The “aim” is the heart of a research study. High quality studies

have a robust and clearly stated aim that flows logically from the
rationale for the study, and around which the study is designed.
The aim under-pins the research question or questions. In quan-
titative research this will be stated in the form of a hypothesis
that can be tested statistically. If the study is concerned with the
impact of an intervention in the form of a treatment or diagnos-
tic test, both the aim and the hypothesis will clearly identify the
“study factor(s)” (the principal independent variable(s) being
investigated and controlled by the researcher) and the “outcome
factors” (the dependent variable(s) used to measure the results),
including how they are measured. The reference population to
which the study is relevant will also be defined.

In qualitative research, the aim and research question
focus on “how?” and “why?” rather than “what?” and “how
many?”, with the purpose of developing an integrated concep-
tual or theoretical understanding of an observed phenomenon.6
Ultimately, the theory or model will reflect the data from
which it is derived. It is said to be grounded in the data and
the most commonly used methodology is called “grounded
theory”,� as originally described by Barney Glaser and Anselm
Strauss of the Chicago School of Sociology. This methodol-
ogy has been used extensively in a variety of modified forms
in health related research. Therefore, in general, the aim of

qualitative research is to use such methods to investigate, document
and describe the knowledge, experiences, behaviour, opinions,
values, attitudes and/or feelings of the individual study sub-
jects in relation to a phenomenon.8

Study design
Table 1 lists a variety of study designs in both quantitative

and qualitative research, listing the salient features of each.
Quantitative study designs are ranked according to the “level of
evidence” that is produced, as shown in Table 2. Randomised
control trials produce the highest level of evidence. Qualitative
research cannot be assigned a rank in the same way, according
to the study design. The strength and quality of the evidence in
qualitative research correlates closely with the degree of rigour
applied in both data collection and analysis. The various tech-
niques used to ensure rigour in qualitative research are described
elsewhere8 and many of these, if not all, should be reflected in
the description of the study design and methodology in a quali-
tative research article.

Whether quantitative or qualitative, the study design must
be appropriate to address the aim of the study and answer the
research question. Ask yourself – Is it appropriate? Are the study
and outcomes factor(s) clearly defined? How are they measured?
Do they target the critical variables? Are any important outcome
factor(s) excluded? If so, why?

Table 1: Various quantitative and qualitative study types, terminology and design considerations.

Quantitative Qualitative

Meta-
analysis

Review of studies on a research question and hypothesis
Stringent inclusion criteria (e.g. only RCTs – below)
Uses statistics to combine samples and analyse results
Increased sample size gives increased statistical power

Cross-
sectional
survey *

Subjects asked about behaviour, actions, experiences, etc.
Self-administered (questionnaire) or structured interview
“Snap shot” at one point in time
Data from a large number of subjects but lacks depth

Systematic
review

Review of literature focused on a research question
Search strategy used that may include “grey” literature
Structured critical appraisal techniques applied

Structured
interview

Predetermined questions, as for questionnaires
Predominantly closed-ended questions (limited responses)
May also include some open-ended questions

Randomised
Control Trial
(RCT)

Prospective study design (experimental)
Subjects randomly allocated to an intervention group (study
factor) and control group (no intervention or placebo)
Pre-determined time-frame and outcome factor(s)

Semi-
structured
interview

Questions around the topic and aim of the study
Interview guide/schedule used but the wording is flexible
Large amount of data (in-depth) from a small sample

Cohort study Prospective and longitudinal study design
Subjects with causative behaviour or activity (study factor)
Control cohort does not engage in the same
Subjects and controls compared for the outcome factor(s)

Unstructured
interview

Broad topic of enquiry with minimal limitations
Open-ended questions without categories

Relies on deep interaction between interviewer and subject

Case-control
study

Retrospective study design (non-experimental)
Subjects have the condition or intervention (study factor)
Controls have no intervention (may be matched to subjects)
Cases and controls compared for outcome factor (s)

Focus groups Groups of 6–10 subjects with some commonality
Discuss an issue of common interest, with a moderator
In-depth discussion and interaction between participants

Case study Analysing outcomes of interesting or rare cases
No statistical analysis
Poor generalisability to populations

Observational
study

Systematically watching interactions between individuals
Recording physical features, behaviour, clothing, etc.
May be at a particular location or in various settings

Longitudinal
study

Observation or measurement over an extended period
Data collected recurrently – e.g. 0, 3, 6, 12, 24 months
Incorporates other study designs

Document
analysis

Searching and reading related documents and records
Extracting data around a particular research question
Categorising data using comparative analysis techniques

Quasi-
experimental
study

Involves non-randomised study and control groups
True experimental study is not possible (e.g. ethically)
Includes pre- and post-intervention measurement

Narrative
analysis

Stories give meaning and context to peoples’ lives
They give insight into behaviour, experiences, attitudes, etc.
May use large units of data – biography or whole interview

* Surveys may also be used in quantitative studies, provided they yield quantifiable data.

Critical appraisal of quantitative and qualitative research literature

The Radiographer 8

Sampling and sample size
Table 3 lists a variety sampling methods. A sample (size n) is

drawn from a population of much larger size (N). Members of the
sample share some commonality (e.g. a disease or condition) with
each other and with the reference population and should thus be
a reasonable representation of that population. Ask yourself – Is
this the case? In quantitative research random sampling produces
the strongest level of evidence. However, this may require a large
amount of money, time and effort. Furthermore, recruitment,
particularly of a control cohort, can be difficult and there are jus-
tifiably strong ethical constraints relating to experimental study
designs. In fact, in reading any good research article, it should be
possible to find a statement that the study has been approved by
a human research ethics committee. If not, the validity must be
questioned.

The necessary sample size in a quantitative study can be
calculated using a formula based on the degree of error that will
be tolerated in statistically testing the “null hypothesis”. In gen-
eral terms, a null hypothesis states that “there is no statistically
significant difference detected in the outcome factor(s) between
the intervention and the control group”. Decisions are made about
the level of “statistical significance” that will satisfy this state-
ment (given the symbol α) and the acceptable level of “statistical
power”. The former is the likelihood of a false positive result
– finding a difference when none really exists – and the latter the

likelihood of a false negative – finding no significant difference
when there actually is one. The level of significance is commonly
set at 0.05 and the statistical power at 0.8 (80%), which means
accepting a 5% chance of a false positive (α or type I error) and
a 20% chance of a false negative (β or type II error). Both will be
reported in a well written article about a well designed study.

In qualitative studies sample sizes are relatively small, with a
preference for purposive sampling – choosing subjects because
they possess particular knowledge, experience or other attributes.
As the aim is to get as much depth as possible, choosing a lim-
ited number of subjects who have substantial experience makes
sense, although, in some studies, the perspective of subjects with
no experience may also be valuable. Ideally all perspectives and
possible variables are accounted for, which is called “theo-
retical sampling”. While qualitative researchers are free to be
selective about who they include in their study, they must justify
the choices they make, providing a breakdown of the demographic
and relevant background characteristics of their sample. Has this
information been given? The sample size is not calculated, as
in quantitative studies, but is limited by the number of subjects
it takes to reach “data saturation” – that is, no new information
about the topic is to be gained by further data collection.

Bias and confounders
A bias is a systematic error that has been introduced by the

Table 2: Hierarchy of evidence.

Level of
evidence

Type of quantitative study design

Level 1a Systematic reviews or meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs)

Level 1b At least one RCT

Level 2a At least one quasi-experimental clinical trial (i.e without randomisation)

Level 2b At least one other type of quasi-experimental study (e.g. cohort study)

Level 3 Non-experimental or descriptive comparative, correlational or case-control studies

Level 4 Expert committee reports and/or clinical experience of respected authorities

NICE National Institute of Clinical Evidence Guidelines or health technology assessment

HSC Health service circular(s)

Table 3: A range of random and non-random sampling methods.

Random sampling Non-random sampling

Simple Sample chosen randomly from a population
Equal possibility of being selected

Convenience Subjects chosen by availability/presence
(e.g. patients on a particular day)

Systematic Population is ordered or ranked
Sample at regular intervals (e.g. every 10th) until the
sample size is reached
Does not give an equal chance of selection

Purposive or
Theoretical

Selection of subjects with specific traits (e.g. experienced
and inexperienced)
Preferred method for qualitative research
Poor generalisability in quantitative (bias)

Stratified Population grouped by a characteristic
(e.g., male/female, inpatient/outpatient)
Sample randomly and equally from groups
Avoids unequal representation or bias

Snowballing Subjects asked to nominate others who fit the inclusion
criteria

Quota Stratified with specific numbers per group
Groups may be unequally represented

Volunteer Canvassing or advertising for subjects
Inviting people to fill-out a questionnaire

Cluster Population divided into sub-populations or clusters (e.g.
electorate, health service)
Randomly select clusters as needed
Include all individuals in selected clusters

T Smith

The Radiographer 9

Table 2: Hierarchy of evidence.
Level of
evidence
Type of quantitative study design
Level 1a Systematic reviews or meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs)
Level 1b At least one RCT
Level 2a At least one quasi-experimental clinical trial (i.e without randomisation)
Level 2b At least one other type of quasi-experimental study (e.g. cohort study)
Level 3 Non-experimental or descriptive comparative, correlational or case-control studies
Level 4 Expert committee reports and/or clinical experience of respected authorities
NICE National Institute of Clinical Evidence Guidelines or health technology assessment
HSC Health service circular(s)
Table 3: A range of random and non-random sampling methods.
Random sampling Non-random sampling
Simple Sample chosen randomly from a population
Equal possibility of being selected
Convenience Subjects chosen by availability/presence
(e.g. patients on a particular day)
Systematic Population is ordered or ranked
Sample at regular intervals (e.g. every 10th) until the
sample size is reached
Does not give an equal chance of selection
Purposive or
Theoretical
Selection of subjects with specific traits (e.g. experienced
and inexperienced)
Preferred method for qualitative research
Poor generalisability in quantitative (bias)
Stratified Population grouped by a characteristic
(e.g., male/female, inpatient/outpatient)
Sample randomly and equally from groups
Avoids unequal representation or bias
Snowballing Subjects asked to nominate others who fit the inclusion
criteria
Quota Stratified with specific numbers per group
Groups may be unequally represented
Volunteer Canvassing or advertising for subjects
Inviting people to fill-out a questionnaire
Cluster Population divided into sub-populations or clusters (e.g.
electorate, health service)
Randomly select clusters as needed
Include all individuals in selected clusters

Critical appraisal of quantitative and qualitative research literature

researcher. For example, using purposive sampling in a quantita-
tive study will introduce “selection” or “sampling bias” – choos-
ing one type of study subject in preference to others. While
purposive sampling is preferred in qualitative studies, it is still
possible to have a selection bias that could intentionally distort the
findings. There are also other forms of bias, such as that due to
non-random assignment of subjects or due to incomplete follow-
up. Ask yourself – Are there any sources of bias? Have they been
acknowledged? How have they been controlled, if at all?

Confounding is a form of bias that is beyond the control of
the researcher or has arisen unintentionally, perhaps without
them being aware of it. Nevertheless, confounders are likely to
influence the results one way or the other and may result in there
being multiple explanations for the outcome, other than the study
factor. Care should be taken to identify any possible confounders
as they decrease construct validity and cast doubt over the results
of a study.

Data analysis
In reports of both quantitative and qualitative research, data

analysis and interpretation must be transparent and explained in
enough detail that the study could be repeated. Ask yourself – Is
this so? In quantitative studies, the statistical tests that have been
used must be specified and the discerning reader should question
whether they are appropriate to the type of data being analysed
and for answering the research question. If necessary, expert opin-
ion should be sought from a statistician.

The data in qualitative studies usually consists of words and
their meaning, not numbers, and so the challenge is for the
researcher to maintain objectivity. Data must be interpreted in
context so that it accurately reflects the informants” perspectives,
not that of the researcher. There are various techniques used
to ensure that data analysis is disciplined and rigourous. First,
where necessary, the researcher declares their role in the research
process, acknowledging any preconceptions they may hold. This
is referred to as reflexivity. Triangulation is the process of using
data from more than one source (e.g. different interest groups)
or using multiple data collection methods (e.g. interviews and
observation). Respondent or participant validation is where the
study conclusions are reviewed by some of the study subjects, to
validate the findings. Sound qualitative studies will include such
techniques.

Data analysis occurs in parallel with data collection in qualita-
tive research studies; otherwise it would not be possible to know
when data saturation had been reached. Analysis informs sub-
sequent data collection, such that the validity of early emergent
themes and sub-themes is tested in later interviews, observation
or focus groups. Data is analysed using comparative analysis of
transcripts or other raw data (inductive analysis), with reference
to what is known from the literature and other sources (deductive
analysis). Both should be evident in the journal article as part of
a logical process of clustering themes and subthemes and into
categories and ultimately into a few key concepts.

Results and conclusions
In quantitative studies the results are expressed statistically,

relative to the level of significance set for the null-hypothesis to be
true, as described earlier. The results will be given as the measured
values of the outcome factor(s) (e.g. sample mean) for both the
intervention and control groups. Even if there is a measured dif-
ference, however, appropriate statistical tests must be performed
to determine whether that difference is real or whether it is a

“spurious” finding that resulted by chance when the null-hypoth-
esis is actually true9; that there is no difference. The probability
that the null-hypothesis is true is calculated as the P value. If the
P value is less than the level of significance (usually < 0.05, as above) there is a low probability that the null-hypothesis is true and it is therefore rejected in favour of the alternative hypothesis that the measured difference is real or “statistically significant”. If the P value is greater than the significance level (i.e. > 0.05, for
example) there is an unacceptably high probability that the null-
hypothesis is true. It cannot be rejected and it is concluded that
there is no statistically significant difference. In some studies the
significance level (α) is set at only 1% so that the P value has to
be < 0.01 to reject the null-hypothesis, in which case the evidence of a real difference is stronger and the result is of “higher statisti- cal significance”.9

When reporting the results of a quantitative study, the type of
statistical tests used must be stated, the p-value must be given
relative to the significance level (P < 0.05 or P < 0.01) and a confidence interval should also be given. The confidence interval (CI) is the range of values of the measurements that the researcher is confident includes the true, population value. For example, with a sample mean difference of 59.65 mm, the 95% CI might be 45.69–64.10 mm, meaning that there is a 95% chance that the mean for the population is within that range. The narrower the CI the greater strength of the finding, so it is important to look at the CI as well as the P value when considering whether to adopt an intervention into clinical practice.

In qualitative studies, there are no statistical measures against
which to assess the results. However, qualitative research is not
intended to draw definitive, universal truths but rather to exam-
ine, describe and conceptualise complex interactions and provide
insight into the way individuals and groups construct their own,
subjective reality. The results of the study will consist of direct
quotations or other raw data that illustrate the findings, leading
to logical conclusions that are traceable back to the original data.
Derived themes and sub-themes merge to form a smaller number
of clearly represented key concepts that can be displayed graphi-
cally as a conceptual model. The results of a well designed, well
performed qualitative study will flow logically from the analysis.

Finally, in critically appraising all research papers, there is a
need to reflect on how well the conclusions are supported by the
results and whether the original research question is answered.
Are the conclusions justified? Have any conclusions been over-
looked? Has the author extrapolated too much from the findings?
Have the limitations of the study been acknowledged? Are new
research questions generated?

Summary
Critical appraisal skills can be acquired, provided the reader

knows what to look for when reading a research article. This
paper summarises the core knowledge necessary for the critical
appraisal of both quantitative and qualitative research. While
the methodology used in both types of research differs greatly,
it is apparent that there are essential commonalities. Both must
include a concisely stated research aim that embodies the research
question(s) and the study design must be appropriate to address
that aim. If the findings are to be applied in practice, the methods
and techniques used must result in maximum possible validity
and reliability, avoiding methodological pitfalls that degrade the
quality of the evidence. Both should be read with a healthy degree
of skepticism about the methods, results and conclusions, whether
the purpose is to inform the design of one’s own research or the

The Radiographer 10

implementation of new clinical protocols and procedures. We are
justified in questioning whether the findings apply to the context
of the population that we are interested in.

The author
Tony Smith PhD MSc BSc DipAppSci(MedRad) FIR

References
1 Strauss SE, Sackett DL. Getting research findings into practice: using research

findings in clinical practice. Br Med J 1998; 31�: 339–42.

2 Trochim WM. Research Methods Knowledge Base. Cornell University ©
2006. Available online at: http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/contents.
php [verified 08/08/09].

3 Garfield E. The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. JAMA 2006;
295 (1): 90–3.

T Smith

4 Darzins PJ, Smith BJ, Heller RF. How to read a journal article. Med J Aust
1992; 15� (6): 389–94.

5 Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper: assessing the methodological quality of
published papers. Br Med J 199�; 315: 305–8.

6 Meadows KA. So you want to do research? An introduction to qualitative
methods. Br J Community Nurs 2003; 8 (10): 464–9.

� Strauss AL, Corbin J. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and
Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications; 1990.

8 Patton MQ. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. 3rd Ed. Thousand
Oaks: Sage Publications; 2002.

9 Daly LE, Bourke GJ, McGilvray J. Interpretation and uses of medical statis-
tics. 4th Ed. Blackwell Scientific Publications. Oxford; 1991.

1/13/2021 Rubric Detail – Blackboard Learn

https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/bbgs-deep-links-BBLEARN/app/course/rubric?course_id=_16781187_1&rubric_id=_2074407_1 1/5

Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Excellent Good Fair Poor

Using the Week 4
Part 4 section of
your Academic
Success and
Professional
Development
Plan Template
presented in the
Resources,
conduct an
analysis of the
elements of the
research article
you identi�ed. Be
sure to include
the following:

· The topic of
interest you have
selected.

· Correctly
formatted APA
citation of the
article you
selected, along
with link or
search details.

· Identify a
professional
practice use of
the
theories/concepts
presented in the
article.

18 (18%) – 20 (20%)
The response
clearly identi�es
the topic of
interest selected.

The response
accurately and
completely
provides a
citation of the
article selected,
including an
accurate and
complete link or
thorough search
details.

The response
clearly identi�es
and describes in
detail a
professional
practice use of
the
theories/concepts
presented in the
article.

16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
The response
partially identi�es
the topic of
interest selected.

The response
provides a partial
citation of the
article selected,
including a partial
link or search
details.

The response
partially identi�es
and describes a
professional
practice use of
the
theories/concepts
presented in the
article.

14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response
vaguely identi�es
the topic of
interest selected.

The response
vaguely or
inaccurately
provides a
citation of the
article selected,
including vague
or inaccurate
search details.

The response
vaguely or
inaccurately
identi�es and
describes a
professional
practice use of
the
theories/concepts
presented in the
article.

0 (0%) – 13 (13%)
The response
vaguely and
inaccurately
identi�es the
topic of interest
selected, or is
missing.

The response
vaguely and
inaccurately
provides a
citation of the
article selected,
including vague
and inaccurate
search details, or
is missing.

The response
vaguely and
inaccurately
identi�es and
describes a
professional
practice use of
the
theories/concepts
presented in the
article, or is
missing.

Name: NURS_6003_Module04_Week07_Assignment_Rubric

EXIT

Grid View List View

1/13/2021 Rubric Detail – Blackboard Learn

https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/bbgs-deep-links-BBLEARN/app/course/rubric?course_id=_16781187_1&rubric_id=_2074407_1 2/5

Excellent Good Fair Poor

Analysis of the
article using the
Research Analysis
Matrix section of
the template.

· Write a one-
paragraph
justi�cation
explaining
whether or not
you would
recommend the
use of this article
to inform
professional
practice.

18 (18%) – 20 (20%)
The response
clearly and
accurately
provides a
detailed analysis
of the article
using the
Research Analysis
Matrix section of
the template.

The response
clearly and
accurately
explains in detail
the justi�cation
of whether or not
to recommend
the use of the
article to inform
professional
practice.

16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
The response
provides a partial
analysis of the
article using the
Research Analysis
Matrix section of
the template.

The response
partially explains
the justi�cation
of whether or not
to recommend
the use of the
article to inform
professional
practice.

14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response
provides a vague
or inaccurate
analysis of the
article using the
Research Analysis
Matrix section of
the template.

The response
vaguely or
inaccurately
explains the
justi�cation of
whether or not to
recommend the
use of the article
to inform
professional
practice.

0 (0%) – 13 (13%)
The response
provides a vague
and inaccurate
analysis of the
article using the
Research Analysis
Matrix section of
the template, or
is missing.

The response
vaguely and
inaccurately
explains the
justi�cation of
whether or not to
recommend the
use of the article
to inform
professional
practice, or is
missing.

1/13/2021 Rubric Detail – Blackboard Learn

https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/bbgs-deep-links-BBLEARN/app/course/rubric?course_id=_16781187_1&rubric_id=_2074407_1 3/5

Excellent Good Fair Poor

Write a 2-3
paragraph
summary that
you will add to
your Academic
Success and
Professional
Development
Plan that includes
the following:

· Describe your
approach to
identifying and
analyzing peer-
reviewed
research.

· Identify at least
two strategies
that you would
use that you
found to be
e�ective in
�nding peer-
reviewed
research.

· Identify at least
one resource you
intend to use in
the future to �nd
peer-reviewed
research.

41 (41%) – 45 (45%)
The response
clearly and
accurately
describes in
detail the
approach to
identifying and
analyzing peer-
reviewed
research.

The response
clearly identi�es
and accurately
describes in
detail at least two
strategies used to
be e�ective in
�nding peer-
reviewed
research.

The response
provides a
complete,
detailed, and
speci�c synthesis
of at least one
outside resource
that may be used
in the future to
�nd peer-
reviewed
research. The
response fully
integrates at least
1 outside
resource and 2-3
course speci�c
resources that
fully supports the
summary
provided.

36 (36%) – 40 (40%)
The response
partially
describes the
approach to
identifying and
analyzing peer-
reviewed
research.

The response
partially identi�es
and describes at
least two
strategies used to
be e�ective in
�nding peer-
reviewed
research.

The response
provides an
accurate
synthesis of at
least one outside
resource that
may be used in
the future to �nd
peer-reviewed
research. The
response
integrates at least
1 outside
resource and 2-3
course speci�c
resources that
support the
summary
provided.

32 (32%) – 35 (35%)
The response
vaguely or
inaccurately
describes the
approach to
identifying and
analyzing peer-
reviewed
research.

The response
vaguely or
inaccurately
identi�es and
describes at least
two strategies
used to be
e�ective in
�nding peer-
reviewed
research.

The response
vaguely or
inaccurately
synthesizes at
least one outside
resource that
may be used in
the future to �nd
peer-reviewed
research. The
response
minimally
integrates
resources that
may support the
summary
provided.

0 (0%) – 31 (31%)
The response
vaguely and
inaccurately
describes the
approach to
identifying and
analyzing peer-
reviewed
research, or is
missing.

The response
vaguely and
inaccurately
identi�es and
describes at least
two strategies
used to be
e�ective in
�nding peer-
reviewed
research, or is
missing.

The response
fails to integrate
any resources
that may be used
in the future to
�nd peer-
reviewed
research to
support the
summary
provided, or is
missing.

1/13/2021 Rubric Detail – Blackboard Learn

https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/bbgs-deep-links-BBLEARN/app/course/rubric?course_id=_16781187_1&rubric_id=_2074407_1 4/5

Excellent Good Fair Poor

Written
Expression and
Formatting –
Paragraph
Development and
Organization:

Paragraphs make
clear points that
support well
developed ideas,
�ow logically, and
demonstrate
continuity of
ideas. Sentences
are carefully
focused–neither
long and
rambling nor
short and lacking
substance. A clear
and
comprehensive
purpose
statement and
introduction is
provided which
delineates all
required criteria.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Paragraphs and
sentences follow
writing standards
for �ow,
continuity, and
clarity.

A clear and
comprehensive
purpose
statement,
introduction, and
conclusion is
provided which
delineates all
required criteria.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Paragraphs and
sentences follow
writing standards
for �ow,
continuity, and
clarity 80% of the
time.

Purpose,
introduction, and
conclusion of the
assignment is
stated, yet is brief
and not
descriptive.

3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5
(3.5%)

Paragraphs and
sentences follow
writing standards
for �ow,
continuity, and
clarity 60%- 79%
of the time.

Purpose,
introduction, and
conclusion of the
assignment is
vague or o�
topic.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Paragraphs and
sentences follow
writing standards
for �ow,
continuity, and
clarity < 60% of the time.

No purpose
statement,
introduction, or
conclusion was
provided.

Written
Expression and
Formatting –
English writing
standards:
Correct grammar,
mechanics, and
proper
punctuation

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct
grammar,
spelling, and
punctuation with
no errors.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1-
2) grammar,
spelling, and
punctuation
errors.

3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5
(3.5%)

Contains several
(3-4) grammar,
spelling, and
punctuation
errors.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥
5) grammar,
spelling, and
punctuation
errors that
interfere with the
reader’s
understanding.

1/13/2021 Rubric Detail – Blackboard Learn

https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/bbgs-deep-links-BBLEARN/app/course/rubric?course_id=_16781187_1&rubric_id=_2074407_1 5/5

Excellent Good Fair Poor

Written
Expression and
Formatting – The
paper follows
correct APA
format for title
page, headings,
font,
spacing, margins,
indentations,
page numbers,
running head,
parenthetical/in-
text citations,
and reference
list.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct APA
format with no
errors.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1-
2) APA format
errors.

3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5
(3.5%)

Contains several
(3-4) APA format
errors.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥
5) APA format
errors.

Total Points: 100

Name: NURS_6003_Module04_Week07_Assignment_Rubric

EXIT

1/13/2021 Reading strategies: Differences between summarizing and synthesizing |

Learning, Teaching and Leadership

https://drsaraheaton.wordpress.com/2010/09/29/reading-strategies-differneces-between-summarizing-and-synthesizing/ 1/4

Learning, Teaching and Leadership

A blog for educators, researchers and other thinkers by Sarah Elaine Eaton, Ph.D.

Reading strategies: Differences between summarizing
and synthesizing

This semester I am teaching a course on Becoming an Effective Learner at the University of Calgary. I
have asked my students to do a reading synthesis assignment on the different readings we have each
week. In today’s post I’m sharing some of the information I gave them about the differences between
summarizing and synthesizing information in terms of reading strategies and research.

If you teach reading and you’d like to share it with your own students, you can download a copy
here: difference-between-summarizing-and-synthesizing
(h�ps://drsaraheaton.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/difference-between-summarizing-and-
synthesizing )

Summarizing and synthesizing are both strategies used in reading and research. They are important
skills, as they help learners make sense of what they reading.

Though they are both used as reading comprehension and research strategies, it is important to
recognize that summarizing and synthesizing are different activities. Each has a different purpose,
process and end result.

These are the main differences between them:

Summary

o A basic reading technique.
o Pulls together information in order to highlight the important points.
o Re-iterates the information.
o Shows what the original authors wrote.
o Addresses one set of information (e.g. article, chapter, document) at a time. Each source remains

distinct.
o Presents a cursory overview.
o Demonstrates an understanding of the overall meaning.

Synthesis

o An advanced reading technique.

https://drsaraheaton.wordpress.com/

https://drsaraheaton.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/difference-between-summarizing-and-synthesizing

1/13/2021 Reading strategies: Differences between summarizing and synthesizing | Learning, Teaching and Leadership

https://drsaraheaton.wordpress.com/2010/09/29/reading-strategies-differneces-between-summarizing-and-synthesizing/ 2/4

o Pulls together information not only to highlight the important points, but also to draw your own
conclusions.

o Combines and contrasts information from different sources.
o Not only reflects your knowledge about what the original authors wrote, but also creates something

new out of two or more pieces of writing.
o Combines parts and elements from a variety of sources into one unified entity.
o Focuses on both main ideas and details.
o Achieves new insight.

As you are reading information, be aware of whether you are simply re-iterating what someone else has
said, or whether you are assimilating all the information in order to create one cohesive document that
demonstrates your understanding of the concepts.

For both activities, it may be helpful to write out the main points, using diagrams or charts to help you.

Here are some helpful resources:

Comprehension Strategy – Synthesis / Summarization / Concluding
h�p://www.readinglady.com/mosaic/tools/Synthesis%20handout%20by%20Deb%20Smith
(h�p://www.readinglady.com/mosaic/tools/Synthesis%20handout%20by%20Deb%20Smith )

How to Synthesize Multiple Sources
h�p://home.cerrocoso.edu/swiridoff/Resources/Composition/how_to_synthesize_multiple_sourc.htm
(h�p://home.cerrocoso.edu/swiridoff/Resources/Composition/how_to_synthesize_multiple_sourc.htm)

REPORT THIS AD

What is a Synthesis Question?
h�p://www.passged.com/student_blogs/maria/2008/10/07/ged-reading-what-is-a-synthesis-question/
(h�p://www.passged.com/student_blogs/maria/2008/10/07/ged-reading-what-is-a-synthesis-question/)

What it means to comprehend
h�p://www.suite101.com/content/what-it-means-to-comprehend-a72619
(h�p://www.suite101.com/content/what-it-means-to-comprehend-a72619)

Reading Strategies

h�p://www.mindtools.com/rdstratg.html (h�p://www.mindtools.com/rdstratg.html)

http://www.readinglady.com/mosaic/tools/Synthesis%20handout%20by%20Deb%20Smith

http://home.cerrocoso.edu/swiridoff/Resources/Composition/how_to_synthesize_multiple_sourc.htm

https://s.pubmine.com/click2/3N7NWUhqrhr84pgUvPQCgdy_vKP6uBPRGM-kLy9nRsYoUFKva9ImbXIjeukfCZ1J6YY2QCT4IFHkUoDHXLLjbEx16GoSvlcvrXIpnz-KrwAFjpsSU2IA1fGMcY1380jUStgwF1uEhVj-ze–A0oZFbGjFkuW3f9HfXoO//https%3A%2F%2Fduckduckgo.com%2F%3Fva%3Dw%26t%3Dhl

http://www.passged.com/student_blogs/maria/2008/10/07/ged-reading-what-is-a-synthesis-question/

http://www.suite101.com/content/what-it-means-to-comprehend-a72619

http://www.mindtools.com/rdstratg.html

1/13/2021 Reading strategies: Differences between summarizing and synthesizing | Learning, Teaching and Leadership

https://drsaraheaton.wordpress.com/2010/09/29/reading-strategies-differneces-between-summarizing-and-synthesizing/ 3/4

_____________

Here’s a link for sharing: Reading strategies: Differences between summarizing and synthesizing
h�p://wp.me/pNAh3-kW (h�p://wp.me/pNAh3-kW)

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you
enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary,
Canada.