Log in using your username and password
- Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
- Latest content
- Current issue
- Write for Us
- BMJ Journals
You are here
- Volume 21, Issue 4
- How to appraise quantitative research
- Article Text
- Article info
- Citation Tools
- Rapid Responses
- Article metrics
This article has a correction. Please see:
- Correction: How to appraise quantitative research - April 01, 2019
- Xabi Cathala 1 ,
- Calvin Moorley 2
- 1 Institute of Vocational Learning , School of Health and Social Care, London South Bank University , London , UK
- 2 Nursing Research and Diversity in Care , School of Health and Social Care, London South Bank University , London , UK
- Correspondence to Mr Xabi Cathala, Institute of Vocational Learning, School of Health and Social Care, London South Bank University London UK ; cathalax{at}lsbu.ac.uk and Dr Calvin Moorley, Nursing Research and Diversity in Care, School of Health and Social Care, London South Bank University, London SE1 0AA, UK; Moorleyc{at}lsbu.ac.uk
https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2018-102996
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Request permissions.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Introduction
Some nurses feel that they lack the necessary skills to read a research paper and to then decide if they should implement the findings into their practice. This is particularly the case when considering the results of quantitative research, which often contains the results of statistical testing. However, nurses have a professional responsibility to critique research to improve their practice, care and patient safety. 1 This article provides a step by step guide on how to critically appraise a quantitative paper.
Title, keywords and the authors
The authors’ names may not mean much, but knowing the following will be helpful:
Their position, for example, academic, researcher or healthcare practitioner.
Their qualification, both professional, for example, a nurse or physiotherapist and academic (eg, degree, masters, doctorate).
This can indicate how the research has been conducted and the authors’ competence on the subject. Basically, do you want to read a paper on quantum physics written by a plumber?
The abstract is a resume of the article and should contain:
Introduction.
Research question/hypothesis.
Methods including sample design, tests used and the statistical analysis (of course! Remember we love numbers).
Main findings.
Conclusion.
The subheadings in the abstract will vary depending on the journal. An abstract should not usually be more than 300 words but this varies depending on specific journal requirements. If the above information is contained in the abstract, it can give you an idea about whether the study is relevant to your area of practice. However, before deciding if the results of a research paper are relevant to your practice, it is important to review the overall quality of the article. This can only be done by reading and critically appraising the entire article.
The introduction
Example: the effect of paracetamol on levels of pain.
My hypothesis is that A has an effect on B, for example, paracetamol has an effect on levels of pain.
My null hypothesis is that A has no effect on B, for example, paracetamol has no effect on pain.
My study will test the null hypothesis and if the null hypothesis is validated then the hypothesis is false (A has no effect on B). This means paracetamol has no effect on the level of pain. If the null hypothesis is rejected then the hypothesis is true (A has an effect on B). This means that paracetamol has an effect on the level of pain.
Background/literature review
The literature review should include reference to recent and relevant research in the area. It should summarise what is already known about the topic and why the research study is needed and state what the study will contribute to new knowledge. 5 The literature review should be up to date, usually 5–8 years, but it will depend on the topic and sometimes it is acceptable to include older (seminal) studies.
Methodology
In quantitative studies, the data analysis varies between studies depending on the type of design used. For example, descriptive, correlative or experimental studies all vary. A descriptive study will describe the pattern of a topic related to one or more variable. 6 A correlational study examines the link (correlation) between two variables 7 and focuses on how a variable will react to a change of another variable. In experimental studies, the researchers manipulate variables looking at outcomes 8 and the sample is commonly assigned into different groups (known as randomisation) to determine the effect (causal) of a condition (independent variable) on a certain outcome. This is a common method used in clinical trials.
There should be sufficient detail provided in the methods section for you to replicate the study (should you want to). To enable you to do this, the following sections are normally included:
Overview and rationale for the methodology.
Participants or sample.
Data collection tools.
Methods of data analysis.
Ethical issues.
Data collection should be clearly explained and the article should discuss how this process was undertaken. Data collection should be systematic, objective, precise, repeatable, valid and reliable. Any tool (eg, a questionnaire) used for data collection should have been piloted (or pretested and/or adjusted) to ensure the quality, validity and reliability of the tool. 9 The participants (the sample) and any randomisation technique used should be identified. The sample size is central in quantitative research, as the findings should be able to be generalised for the wider population. 10 The data analysis can be done manually or more complex analyses performed using computer software sometimes with advice of a statistician. From this analysis, results like mode, mean, median, p value, CI and so on are always presented in a numerical format.
The author(s) should present the results clearly. These may be presented in graphs, charts or tables alongside some text. You should perform your own critique of the data analysis process; just because a paper has been published, it does not mean it is perfect. Your findings may be different from the author’s. Through critical analysis the reader may find an error in the study process that authors have not seen or highlighted. These errors can change the study result or change a study you thought was strong to weak. To help you critique a quantitative research paper, some guidance on understanding statistical terminology is provided in table 1 .
- View inline
Some basic guidance for understanding statistics
Quantitative studies examine the relationship between variables, and the p value illustrates this objectively. 11 If the p value is less than 0.05, the null hypothesis is rejected and the hypothesis is accepted and the study will say there is a significant difference. If the p value is more than 0.05, the null hypothesis is accepted then the hypothesis is rejected. The study will say there is no significant difference. As a general rule, a p value of less than 0.05 means, the hypothesis is accepted and if it is more than 0.05 the hypothesis is rejected.
The CI is a number between 0 and 1 or is written as a per cent, demonstrating the level of confidence the reader can have in the result. 12 The CI is calculated by subtracting the p value to 1 (1–p). If there is a p value of 0.05, the CI will be 1–0.05=0.95=95%. A CI over 95% means, we can be confident the result is statistically significant. A CI below 95% means, the result is not statistically significant. The p values and CI highlight the confidence and robustness of a result.
Discussion, recommendations and conclusion
The final section of the paper is where the authors discuss their results and link them to other literature in the area (some of which may have been included in the literature review at the start of the paper). This reminds the reader of what is already known, what the study has found and what new information it adds. The discussion should demonstrate how the authors interpreted their results and how they contribute to new knowledge in the area. Implications for practice and future research should also be highlighted in this section of the paper.
A few other areas you may find helpful are:
Limitations of the study.
Conflicts of interest.
Table 2 provides a useful tool to help you apply the learning in this paper to the critiquing of quantitative research papers.
Quantitative paper appraisal checklist
- 1. ↵ Nursing and Midwifery Council , 2015 . The code: standard of conduct, performance and ethics for nurses and midwives https://www.nmc.org.uk/globalassets/sitedocuments/nmc-publications/nmc-code.pdf ( accessed 21.8.18 ).
- Gerrish K ,
- Moorley C ,
- Tunariu A , et al
- Shorten A ,
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent Not required.
Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Correction notice This article has been updated since its original publication to update p values from 0.5 to 0.05 throughout.
Linked Articles
- Miscellaneous Correction: How to appraise quantitative research BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and RCN Publishing Company Ltd Evidence-Based Nursing 2019; 22 62-62 Published Online First: 31 Jan 2019. doi: 10.1136/eb-2018-102996corr1
Read the full text or download the PDF:
SPH Writing Support Services
- Appointment System
- ESL Conversation Group
- Mini-Courses
- Thesis/Dissertation Writing Group
- Career Writing
- Citing Sources
- Critiquing Research Articles
- Project Planning for the Beginner This link opens in a new window
- Grant Writing
- Publishing in the Sciences
- Systematic Review Overview
- Systematic Review Resources This link opens in a new window
- Writing Across Borders / Writing Across the Curriculum
- Conducting an article critique for a quantitative research study: Perspectives for doctoral students and other novice readers (Vance et al.)
- Critique Process (Boswell & Cannon)
- The experience of critiquing published research: Learning from the student and researcher perspective (Knowles & Gray)
- A guide to critiquing a research paper. Methodological appraisal of a paper on nurses in abortion care (Lipp & Fothergill)
- Step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 1: Quantitative research (Coughlan et al.)
- Step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 2: Qualitative research (Coughlan et al.)
Guidelines:
- Critiquing Research Articles (Flinders University)
- Framework for How to Read and Critique a Research Study (American Nurses Association)
- How to Critique a Journal Article (UIS)
- How to Critique a Research Paper (University of Michigan)
- How to Write an Article Critique
- Research Article Critique Form
- Writing a Critique or Review of a Research Article (University of Calgary)
Presentations:
- The Critique Process: Reviewing and Critiquing Research
- Writing a Critique
- << Previous: Citing Sources
- Next: Project Planning for the Beginner >>
- Last Updated: Apr 30, 2024 12:52 PM
- URL: https://libguides.sph.uth.tmc.edu/writing_support_services
An official website of the United States government
The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.
The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
- Publications
- Account settings
- My Bibliography
- Collections
- Citation manager
Save citation to file
Email citation, add to collections.
- Create a new collection
- Add to an existing collection
Add to My Bibliography
Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.
- Search in PubMed
- Search in NLM Catalog
- Add to Search
Step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 1: quantitative research
Affiliation.
- 1 School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Dublin, Trinity College, Dublin.
- PMID: 17577184
- DOI: 10.12968/bjon.2007.16.11.23681
When caring for patients, it is essential that nurses are using the current best practice. To determine what this is, nurses must be able to read research critically. But for many qualified and student nurses, the terminology used in research can be difficult to understand, thus making critical reading even more daunting. It is imperative in nursing that care has its foundations in sound research, and it is essential that all nurses have the ability to critically appraise research to identify what is best practice. This article is a step-by-step approach to critiquing quantitative research to help nurses demystify the process and decode the terminology.
PubMed Disclaimer
Similar articles
- Critiquing research for use in practice. Dale JC. Dale JC. J Pediatr Health Care. 2005 May-Jun;19(3):183-6. doi: 10.1016/j.pedhc.2005.02.004. J Pediatr Health Care. 2005. PMID: 15867836 No abstract available.
- Step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 2: Qualitative research. Ryan F, Coughlan M, Cronin P. Ryan F, et al. Br J Nurs. 2007 Jun 28-Jul 11;16(12):738-44. doi: 10.12968/bjon.2007.16.12.23726. Br J Nurs. 2007. PMID: 17851363 Review.
- Presenting research to clinicians: strategies for writing about research findings. Oermann MH, Galvin EA, Floyd JA, Roop JC. Oermann MH, et al. Nurse Res. 2006;13(4):66-74. doi: 10.7748/nr2006.07.13.4.66.c5990. Nurse Res. 2006. PMID: 16897941 Review.
- Undertaking a literature review: a step-by-step approach. Cronin P, Ryan F, Coughlan M. Cronin P, et al. Br J Nurs. 2008 Jan 10-23;17(1):38-43. doi: 10.12968/bjon.2008.17.1.28059. Br J Nurs. 2008. PMID: 18399395 Review.
- Reflections on how to write and organise a research thesis. Hardy S, Ramjeet J. Hardy S, et al. Nurse Res. 2005;13(2):27-39. doi: 10.7748/nr.13.2.27.s5. Nurse Res. 2005. PMID: 16416978 Review.
- Mental distress among university students in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. Mutinta G. Mutinta G. BMC Psychol. 2022 Aug 18;10(1):204. doi: 10.1186/s40359-022-00903-8. BMC Psychol. 2022. PMID: 35982493 Free PMC article.
- Health inequalities in post-conflict settings: A systematic review. Bwirire D, Crutzen R, Ntabe Namegabe E, Letschert R, de Vries N. Bwirire D, et al. PLoS One. 2022 Mar 14;17(3):e0265038. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0265038. eCollection 2022. PLoS One. 2022. PMID: 35286351 Free PMC article.
- Describing the categories of people that contribute to an Emergency Centre crowd at Khayelitsha hospital, Western Cape, South Africa. Ahiable E, Lahri S, Bruijns S. Ahiable E, et al. Afr J Emerg Med. 2017 Jun;7(2):68-73. doi: 10.1016/j.afjem.2017.04.004. Epub 2017 Apr 20. Afr J Emerg Med. 2017. PMID: 30456111 Free PMC article.
- Women's experiences with postpartum anxiety disorders: a narrative literature review. Ali E. Ali E. Int J Womens Health. 2018 May 29;10:237-249. doi: 10.2147/IJWH.S158621. eCollection 2018. Int J Womens Health. 2018. PMID: 29881312 Free PMC article. Review.
- Barriers to successful implementation of prevention-of-mother-to-child-transmission (PMTCT) of HIV programmes in Malawi and Nigeria: a critical literature review study. Okoli JC, Lansdown GE. Okoli JC, et al. Pan Afr Med J. 2014 Oct 15;19:154. doi: 10.11604/pamj.2014.19.154.4225. eCollection 2014. Pan Afr Med J. 2014. PMID: 25767672 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
- Search in MeSH
Related information
- PubChem Compound
- PubChem Substance
LinkOut - more resources
Full text sources.
- Citation Manager
NCBI Literature Resources
MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer
The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.
Critical Appraisal of Quantitative Research
- Living reference work entry
- Latest version View entry history
- First Online: 12 June 2018
- Cite this living reference work entry
- Rocco Cavaleri 2 ,
- Sameer Bhole 3 , 5 &
- Amit Arora 2 , 4 , 5
1312 Accesses
1 Citations
2 Altmetric
Critical appraisal skills are important for anyone wishing to make informed decisions or improve the quality of healthcare delivery. A good critical appraisal provides information regarding the believability and usefulness of a particular study. However, the appraisal process is often overlooked, and critically appraising quantitative research can be daunting for both researchers and clinicians. This chapter introduces the concept of critical appraisal and highlights its importance in evidence-based practice. Readers are then introduced to the most common quantitative study designs and key questions to ask when appraising each type of study. These studies include systematic reviews, experimental studies (randomized controlled trials and non-randomized controlled trials), and observational studies (cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies). This chapter also provides the tools most commonly used to appraise the methodological and reporting quality of quantitative studies. Overall, this chapter serves as a step-by-step guide to appraising quantitative research in healthcare settings.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Institutional subscriptions
Similar content being viewed by others
Appraisal of Qualitative Studies
Literature Evaluation and Critique
Altman DG, Bland JM. Treatment allocation in controlled trials: why randomise? BMJ. 1999;318(7192):1209.
Article Google Scholar
Arora A, Scott JA, Bhole S, Do L, Schwarz E, Blinkhorn AS. Early childhood feeding practices and dental caries in preschool children: a multi-centre birth cohort study. BMC Public Health. 2011;11(1):28.
Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, … Lijmer JG. The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138(1):W1–12.
Google Scholar
Cavaleri R, Schabrun S, Te M, Chipchase L. Hand therapy versus corticosteroid injections in the treatment of de quervain’s disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hand Ther. 2016;29(1):3–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jht.2015.10.004 .
Centre for Evidence-based Management. Critical appraisal tools. 2017. Retrieved 20 Dec 2017, from https://www.cebma.org/resources-and-tools/what-is-critical-appraisal/ .
Centre for Evidence-based Medicine. Critical appraisal worksheets. 2017. Retrieved 3 Dec 2017, from http://www.cebm.net/blog/2014/06/10/critical-appraisal/ .
Clark HD, Wells GA, Huët C, McAlister FA, Salmi LR, Fergusson D, Laupacis A. Assessing the quality of randomized trials: reliability of the jadad scale. Control Clin Trials. 1999;20(5):448–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0197-2456(99)00026-4 .
Critical Appraisal Skills Program. Casp checklists. 2017. Retrieved 5 Dec 2017, from http://www.casp-uk.net/casp-tools-checklists .
Dawes M, Davies P, Gray A, Mant J, Seers K, Snowball R. Evidence-based practice: a primer for health care professionals. London: Elsevier; 2005.
Dumville JC, Torgerson DJ, Hewitt CE. Research methods: reporting attrition in randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2006;332(7547):969.
Greenhalgh T, Donald A. Evidence-based health care workbook: understanding research for individual and group learning. London: BMJ Publishing Group; 2000.
Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Cook DJ, Guyatt G, Bass E, Brill-Edwards P, … Gerstein H. Users’ guides to the medical literature: II. How to use an article about therapy or prevention. JAMA. 1993;270(21):2598–601.
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Akl EA, Kunz R, Vist G, Brozek J, … Jaeschke R. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction – GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(4), 383–94.
Herbert R, Jamtvedt G, Mead J, Birger Hagen K. Practical evidence-based physiotherapy. London: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2005.
Hewitt CE, Torgerson DJ. Is restricted randomisation necessary? BMJ. 2006;332(7556):1506–8.
Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.0.2. The cochrane collaboration. 2009. Retrieved 3 Dec 2017, from http://www.cochrane-handbook.org .
Hoffmann T, Bennett S, Del Mar C. Evidence-based practice across the health professions. Chatswood: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2013.
Hoffmann T, Glasziou PP, Boutron I, Milne R, Perera R, Moher D, … Johnston M. Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ, 2014;348: g1687.
Joanna Briggs Institute. Critical appraisal tools. 2017. Retrieved 4 Dec 2017, from http://joannabriggs.org/research/critical-appraisal-tools.html .
Mhaskar R, Emmanuel P, Mishra S, Patel S, Naik E, Kumar A. Critical appraisal skills are essential to informed decision-making. Indian J Sex Transm Dis. 2009;30(2):112–9. https://doi.org/10.4103/0253-7184.62770 .
Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized trials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2001;1(1):2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-1-2 .
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Prisma Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the prisma statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.
National Health and Medical Research Council. NHMRC additional levels of evidence and grades for recommendations for developers of guidelines. Canberra: NHMRC; 2009. Retrieved from https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/file/guidelines/developers/nhmrc_levels_grades_evidence_120423.pdf .
National Heart Lung and Blood Institute. Study quality assessment tools. 2017. Retrieved 17 Dec 2017, from https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-assessment-tools .
Physiotherapy Evidence Database. PEDro scale. 2017. Retrieved 10 Dec 2017, from https://www.pedro.org.au/english/downloads/pedro-scale/ .
Portney L, Watkins M. Foundations of clinical research: application to practice. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River: F.A. Davis Company/Publishers; 2009.
Roberts C, Torgerson DJ. Understanding controlled trials: baseline imbalance in randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 1999;319(7203):185.
Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, Thuku M, Hamel C, Moran J, … Kristjansson E. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ. 2017;358:j4008. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4008 .
Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, Savović J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M, … Boutron I. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ. 2016;355:i4919.
Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, … Thacker SB. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. JAMA. 2000;283(15):2008–12.
Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, Initiative S. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (strobe) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Int J Surg. 2014;12(12):1495–9.
Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Reitsma JB, … Bossuyt PM. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 2011;155(8):529–36.
Download references
Author information
Authors and affiliations.
School of Science and Health, Western Sydney University, Campbelltown, NSW, Australia
Rocco Cavaleri & Amit Arora
Sydney Dental School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Surry Hills, NSW, Australia
Sameer Bhole
Discipline of Child and Adolescent Health, Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Westmead, NSW, Australia
Oral Health Services, Sydney Local Health District and Sydney Dental Hospital, NSW Health, Surry Hills, NSW, Australia
Sameer Bhole & Amit Arora
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Rocco Cavaleri .
Editor information
Editors and affiliations.
School of Science & Health, Western Sydney University, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia
Pranee Liamputtong
Rights and permissions
Reprints and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this entry
Cite this entry.
Cavaleri, R., Bhole, S., Arora, A. (2018). Critical Appraisal of Quantitative Research. In: Liamputtong, P. (eds) Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences . Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2779-6_120-2
Download citation
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2779-6_120-2
Received : 20 January 2018
Accepted : 12 February 2018
Published : 12 June 2018
Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN : 978-981-10-2779-6
Online ISBN : 978-981-10-2779-6
eBook Packages : Springer Reference Social Sciences Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences
- Publish with us
Policies and ethics
Chapter history
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2779-6_120-2
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2779-6_120-1
- Find a journal
- Track your research
arXiv's Accessibility Forum starts next month!
Help | Advanced Search
Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence
Title: the evolution of reinforcement learning in quantitative finance.
Abstract: Reinforcement Learning (RL) has experienced significant advancement over the past decade, prompting a growing interest in applications within finance. This survey critically evaluates 167 publications, exploring diverse RL applications and frameworks in finance. Financial markets, marked by their complexity, multi-agent nature, information asymmetry, and inherent randomness, serve as an intriguing test-bed for RL. Traditional finance offers certain solutions, and RL advances these with a more dynamic approach, incorporating machine learning methods, including transfer learning, meta-learning, and multi-agent solutions. This survey dissects key RL components through the lens of Quantitative Finance. We uncover emerging themes, propose areas for future research, and critique the strengths and weaknesses of existing methods.
Comments: | This work is currently submitted to and under-review for ACM Computing Surveys. This copy is an unedited, pre-print version and it is the author's version of the work. I |
Subjects: | Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computational Engineering, Finance, and Science (cs.CE); Machine Learning (cs.LG) |
classes: | I.2.6; I.2.1 |
Cite as: | [cs.AI] |
(or [cs.AI] for this version) | |
Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite |
Submission history
Access paper:.
- HTML (experimental)
- Other Formats
References & Citations
- Google Scholar
- Semantic Scholar
BibTeX formatted citation
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Code, data and media associated with this article, recommenders and search tools.
- Institution
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs .
Pardon Our Interruption
As you were browsing something about your browser made us think you were a bot. There are a few reasons this might happen:
- You've disabled JavaScript in your web browser.
- You're a power user moving through this website with super-human speed.
- You've disabled cookies in your web browser.
- A third-party browser plugin, such as Ghostery or NoScript, is preventing JavaScript from running. Additional information is available in this support article .
To regain access, please make sure that cookies and JavaScript are enabled before reloading the page.
IMAGES
COMMENTS
It is imperative in nursing that care has its foundations in sound research and it is essential that all nurses have the ability to critically appraise research to identify what is best practice. This article is a step-by step-approach to critiquing quantitative research to help nurses demystify the process and decode the terminology.
However, nurses have a professional responsibility to critique research to improve their practice, care and patient safety. 1 This article provides a step by step guide on how to critically appraise a quantitative paper.
Because there are few published examples of critique examples, this article provides the practical points of conducting a formally written quantitative research article critique while providing a ...
PDF | A practical example of how to critique a research article Video abstract on: https://youtu.be/H7ah7z_TMwI | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ...
Abstract. Learning how to critique research articles is one of the fundamental skills of scholarship in any discipline. The range, quantity and quality of publications available today via print, electronic and Internet databases means it has become essential to equip students and practitioners with the prerequisites to judge the integrity and ...
Conducting an article critique for a quantitative research study: Perspectives for doctoral students and other novice readers (Vance et al.) Critique Process (Boswell & Cannon) The experience of critiquing published research: Learning from the student and researcher perspective (Knowles & Gray) A guide to critiquing a research paper.
However, a fundamental knowledge of research methods is still needed in order to be successful. Because there are few published examples of critique examples, this article provides the practical points of conducting a formally written quantitative research article critique while providing a brief example to demonstrate the principles and form.
Abstract. QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH is a systematic approach to investigating numerical data and involves measuring or counting attributes, that is quantities. Through a process of transforming information that is collected or observed, the researcher can often describes a situation or event, answering the 'what' and 'how many' questions about a ...
If you are reviewing a research study, organize the body of your critique according to the paper's structure. See Table 1 for specific suggestions about questions to ask in critiquing the various elements of a research article.
Nurses should develop a systematic process to evaluate research articles to aide in the thoroughness of their critique (Bessett & Bessett, 2003). Key areas for review include the general overview, the introduction and literature review, the purpose, the methodology, and the discussion and conclusion. As a nurse has more practice in the critique ...
The first step is to critique and appraise the research evidence. Through critiquing and appraising the research evidence, dialog with colleagues, and changing practice based on evidence, NPs can improve patient outcomes ( Dale, 2005) and successfully translate research into evidence-based practice in today's ever-changing health care ...
Because there are few published examples of critique examples, this article provides the practical points of conducting a formally written quantitative research article critique while providing a brief example to demonstrate the principles and form. Keywords: quantitative article critique, statistics, methodology, graduate students
PDF | Critical appraisal skills are important for anyone wishing to make informed decisions or improve the quality of healthcare delivery. A good... | Find, read and cite all the research you need ...
It is imperative in nursing that care has its foundations in sound research, and it is essential that all nurses have the ability to critically appraise research to identify what is best practice. This article is a step-by-step approach to critiquing quantitative research to help nurses demystify the process and decode the terminology.
Critical appraisal skills are important for anyone wishing to make informed decisions or improve the quality of healthcare delivery. A good critical appraisal provides information regarding the believability and usefulness of a particular study. However, the...
Quantitative Research Critique Quantitative research is an examination of data using methods to both identify and solve problems. Empirical evidence is collected and analyzed in a systematic fashion to produce resolutions to gaps in knowledge and practice (Polit & Beck, 2018, p. 41). In a study by Ciavattini, et al. (2015) the number and size of uterine fibroids in pregnant women was ...
Quantitative Article. The quantitative study I chose to critique is, "Effectiveness of turning with unequal time. intervals on th. incidence of pressure ulcer lesions" (Vanderwee, Grypdonck, De Bacquer, &Def. oor, 2010). This study focused on t. use of two different turning schedules on the effectsof.
Summary In this paper, we have taken a previously published article on nurses' judgements in abortion care performing a systematic critique of the merits of this research using a recognised critiquing framework.
A Quantitative Research Critique. The purpose of this paper is to critique the research article, "The Use of Personal Digital. Assistants at the Point of Care in an Undergraduate Nursing Program", pu. shed in CIN:Computers, Informatics, Nursing (Goldsworthy, Lawrence, and Goodman, 2006). Nies. utilizing Nieswiadomy's research critique ...
PDF | On Jan 12, 2020, Linz Fitzpatrick published A Quantitative Critique on a Journal Article in Reference to Individual Differences. (Critique for my MSc Module- has been assessed) | Find, read ...
Quantitative Critique Quantitative research is an important part of research due to its design. The design of quantitative data gathers information based on factual evidence, statistics, and numerical data on a specific population in the study. Quantitative research is the best route to prove or disprove a hypothesis for a study.
A Quantitative Research Critique Paper When researchers have a certain problem, they will use quantitative research that will enable them to come to a solution. It uses an objective method that is designed to control the question with the ultimate goal of maximizing value. Researchers must gather empirical evidence in which all information is gathered indirectly or directly through senses ...
View a PDF of the paper titled The Evolution of Reinforcement Learning in Quantitative Finance, by Nikolaos Pippas and 2 other authors ... This survey dissects key RL components through the lens of Quantitative Finance. We uncover emerging themes, propose areas for future research, and critique the strengths and weaknesses of existing methods ...
Preview text Jasmine C Viera Dr. Suzanne Mullings Nursing Research for Evidence Based Practice Quantitative Research Critique Paper Building Capacity for Evidence-Based Practice: Understanding How Licensed PracticalNurses (LPNs) Source Knowledge Purpose of the study (10 points)
Communications document from Southern New Hampshire University, 7 pages, Week 3 Assignment: Critiquing Quantitative or Qualitative Research Overview: This week's assignment asks the student to critique examples of published research. During a professional career, one will often be presented with research on a specific topic. A