Critical Analysis of Research on the Lived Experience of COVID-19
Verified
Added on  2023/06/04
|9
|2953
|130
AI Summary
This article provides a critical analysis of a qualitative research study on the impact of COVID-19 on people's physical and psychological experiences. The study's methodology, data collection, and analysis are evaluated, and the relevance and limitations of the study are discussed.
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someoneâs learning journey. Share your
documents today.
Assessment 3 Critical Analysis of Research
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
Table of Contents INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3 MAIN BODY..................................................................................................................................3 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................3 REFERENCES................................................................................................................................1
INTRODUCTION Critical analysis is referred as a detailed evaluation or evaluation of the ideas and perceptions of different authors. This is crucial for evaluating the viability of an article or research paper and identify the salient factors which can be enhanced for better results. The current article is based on the living situations which are related with the coronavirus disease. This qualitative research study is based upon the impact of Covid-19 pandemic on people and the physical and psychological experiences which are gained by the population due to such aspects. The impact of this virus on the experience and stability of the patients has a significant influence on their mental peace. MAIN BODY Source:TheLivedExperienceofCOVID-19.2021.[Online].AvailableThrough: <https://www.npjournal.org/article/S1555-4155(21)00177-X/fulltext> The research study does not have a clear aim or goal of the research which defines the overall purpose of the qualitative research study precisely. Although, in the introduction part of the research, the aim of the study is provided at the end which gives a hint of the overall analysis of the experience of the patients which got infected due to Covid-19 pandemic. It is important to provide a separate section for the understanding of aims and objectives of the qualitative research appropriately (LDodd and et.al. 2021). The selected topic is considered as important by the researcher as Covid-19 pandemic had a severe impact on the living conditions of people. This phenomenon has increased the number of death in the global environment and restricted people to their homes. These situations created pressure on the people which had a negative influence on their living standards. The relevance of this topic is clearly explained in this study as it has shown the different aspects which had a major influence on the overall satisfaction levels of the people in the environment. The qualitative methodology has been appropriate in order to analyse the responses of the participants and develop better conclusions which are related with the experience of individuals who got infected due to Covid-19. The psychological and physical experiences of participants have been reported with the help of the qualitative study which has shown that different side effects or symptoms have been faced by them. Fever, loss of smell and taste, weight loss, fatigue etc. are the physical incidents while isolation, anger, fear, anxiety etc. are the psychological
experiences of people in the pandemic times. The qualitative research have been beneficial in ordertounderstandthepersonalfeelingsandperceptionsoftheselectedsampleof14 participants towards the impact of Covid-19 on their lives. This study have provided the knowledge of personal experiences of the respondents which have been affected due to the Covid-19 pandemic(Lee & Waters, 2021). It has clearly provided a better platform to address the research goal as the personal experiences of the respondents are identified and evaluated with the help of primary data collection tool such as the demographic questionnaire and semi- structured interview. However, a statistical analysis on the topic would have provided deep knowledge on the actual data of the patients who have dealt with these problems or any other such issues due to the pandemic. It could have increased the viability of the results and provided a better data or knowledge of the different aspects which are crucial for understanding the life experiences of patients in the Covid-19 pandemic. The descriptive research design has been beneficial for the qualitative research study as it is an effective method to gather, analyse and describe the collected data appropriately. This research design has provided better assistance for supporting the aims and objectives of this qualitative research study. Although, the justification for choosing this research design is not provided in this qualitative study. The reason for choosing this method has not been identified by the researcher in this study. This has reduced the reliability of the results which are achieved with the help of this article. A mention of research design has been given in the qualitative study and its major impact or relevance for this particular topic has not been clearly stated. It has not been discussed by the researcher about how they have decided to choose their appropriate methods. This provides a weak information about the inefficiency of the researcher to provide appropriate information about the research design. These issues create a negative impact on the feasibility of the results and reduces the overall performance of the researcher to gain better advantage in analysing the results. The recruitment strategy of the researcher was beneficial for achieving the aims and objectives of the qualitative study. It provided better assistance for enhancing the performance of the study to justify reach their objectives effectively. The process for the selection of participants has been clearly mentioned in this research. This has provided a better understanding of the methods which are used by the researcher to select and connect with the candidates. The researched could have given more emphasis on the description of these aspects which may
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
provide better assistance for finding the results(SandĂn and et.al. 2020). The knowledge of the need for these participants for this study has also not provided by the researcher which has made the analysis to be weak. The study was unable to provide appropriate knowledge about choices which were made by the researcher to select the candidates which are suitable for giving their ideas and thoughts on the topic. It has been described in the research study that people have been resistant to take part in interview due to the hesitance for being questioned. It was difficult for them to accept that they have been diagnosed with the Covid-19 due to the embarrassment and potential stigma associated with it. It has been clearly mentioned in the conclusion that these factors had a negative influence on the overall management of the interview due to less interest among the candidates to register their responses. This provides knowledge about the likeliness of the participants towards taking part in the interview. Data was appropriately collected by the researcher and proper knowledge of the process and the results have been shared in this qualitative research study. The setting of data collection was clearly justified by the researcher and the results were successfully provided which has increased the overall performance of this topic to provide the suitable information required for this aspect to take place. The data was collected with the help of a semi-structured interview which was used to question the adults which were diagnosed with Covid-19. These respondents were above 18 years of age which are interviewed via telephone in order to follow the Covid-19 protocols(Vazquez-Vazquezandet.al.2021).Openendedquestionswereaskedthese respondents and their answers were registered properly which provided better assistance for increasing their interest in the recruitment appropriately. The chosen method has been clearly justified by the author as he stated that the snowball technique of data saturation has been appropriate for sharing the live experiences of participants in the tough times of the Covid-19 pandemic. This has been effective for enhancing the knowledge which is related with this aspects which is crucial for understanding the significance of the topics successfully. The method of collection has not made explicit by the researcher and the process for the explaining of the interview is not appropriately mentioned in this research successfully. This may provide less opportunity for understanding the reliability of the data collection tool and its impact on the viability of the results. This may have a significant impact on the overall performance of the results which have been generated with the help of these aspects by the researcher. There is no information about modifications in the qualitative study. The inputs from the respondents have
been directly taken and no such alterations have been made by the researchers which can have a significant influence on the performance of the qualitative study. The changes in the methods have not been made which has been beneficial for maintaining the significance of he results which is essential for gaining better assistance in the environment. The saturation of data is not clearly stated by the researcher and its implications have not been justified which may have a significant influence on the overall performance of the results which are generated with the help of this research. The relationship between the participants and the researcher is not clearly considered in this research. Own role of the researcher is not given due consideration which may have a significant influence on the overall performance of the results significantly. The formulation of the research questions are not stated appropriately and different aspects are not considered by the researcher which can have a significant impact on the productivity of output. The choice of location is also not mentioned in this research appropriately which shows that there is a weak description of such factors by the researcher(Brown & Shenker, 2021). The researcher has positivelyreactedtotheeventsthatoccurredduringthestudyandprovidedabetter understanding of the problems and issues which were being faced by the patients due to such activities. The physical and psychological impact of Covid-19 on the patients has been clearly described by the researcher with the help of effective analysis and interpretation of the results which has been crucial for increasing the viability of the results successfully. A small inference of the ethical guidelines has been provided by the author in the footnotes which explains that no relationships have been developed with businesses which can share the information which is related with the inputs of the respondents. This is helpful for reducing the conflict of interests among people and generating better quality of output. There is a proper explanation of the interview processes and all the tools which were provided to the participants for improving their interest towards the topics. However, information about the consent has not been mentioned in the researcher which may have a negative impact on the overall privacy needs of the candidates which have been associated with the research. The approval from ethics committee is also not mentioned in this report which may have a significant influence on the overall reliability of the results. The analysis of data has been sufficiently rigorous as an in-depth analysis has been made on the topics which has been crucial for increasing the knowledge on the uindertaken topics. The
description of different themes have been beneficial in order to understand the concept of the impact of Covid-19 on the living experiences of the general population. The information about presentation of specific data from the data samples have not been mentioned by the researcher which holds a negative influence on the efficiency of the results. Appropriate data has been shared by the researcher in the qualitative research study to demonstrate the physical and psychological impact of Covid-19 on the patients. The data has been more static and less contradictory which shows that maximum population was facing common issues in the difficult times of the pandemic. The own roles and responsibilities of the researcher have not been analysed in this research due to lack of options which were available for them to provide knowledge about the impact of these factors on the health conditions of the patients. Yes, it would be a fair judgement to pass that there has been a clear statement when it comes to findings. While talking about explicitness of findings then not to the fullest extent. It was aimed to be highly explicit since the relation of physical and psychological experiences can only be perceived with higher explicitness. Research has presented both for and against arguments for his considered topic. In discussion section the pros and cons were presented so can make better judgement. For this aim some essential evidence were also presented and supported by the outcomes. The research has discussed the credibility but not to the fullest extent. Since in such research studies it becomes highly essential to ensure credibility. Phycology is a dynamic realm where usefulness of validation, triangulation become comprehensive. But in the study it was found that the entire discussion was accentuating to just outcomes and was less likely to discuss its validity aspect. Because the study has revealed some ice breaking outcomes so it needed to have better validity so the outcomes can be used for further study(Li & Mutchler, 2020). When it comes to synchronization with the original research questions than it is highly eulogizing since the researcher has paid radical attention to this notion and abided with the research questions. There were three main highlights such as physical and psychological experiences while spending life with Covid-19, then shortly discussing its impacts both negative and positive. At the end, similarities of different patients experienced that thing. So altogether it would be tentative to say that the findings were discussing in relation to the intended questions. The entire research was intended to make a great contribution to the society and for betterment of all stakeholders. In the very beginning the researcher has articulated abstract where the research, its aim, objective, the way it was conducted were articulated. It was also suggested
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
that the research would be helpful for nurses and health care providers so can get better experience. The research was prone to abide with the undertaken questions to drive intended outcomes. It has revealed all output guiding better suggestions to the users. Keeping the conviction in mind it can be perceived that the research was highly prone to make bigger contribution to the society. On the other hands, when it is about suggesting new areas of study then in the research there is no such clear explanation. But it would be utterly unfair to say that they did not give any such clue. The research has articulated some important dimensions in implication heading. Which is hugely discussing the impacts which affected experiences and how they could have been sorted out. So by making sort of deeper observation some new realms can be traced and study can be driven on them. The research has also discussed that how the study outcomes would be transferred to other populations in again implication section to the broader level. Yet it was intended to just discuss on the undertaken population so was not directly generalized but the outcomes are highly prone to be used on wider population. CONCLUSION From the above critical analysis it has been evaluated that the author has provided enough information about the different aspects which were important for the analysis of the influence of Covid-19 pandemic on the health of people. The different aspects have been clearly mentioned which has a significant impact on the performance of the research successfully. There have been certain aspects which are not particularly given consideration due to the aspects which are considered as important for changing the management of the issues which create a significant impact on the performance of the research to display the results appropriately.
REFERENCES Books and journals Brown, A., & Shenker, N. (2021). Experiences of breastfeeding during COVIDâ19: Lessons for future practical and emotional support.Maternal & child nutrition,17(1), e13088. Dodd, R. H. and et.al. (2021). Psychological wellbeing and academic experience of university studentsinAustraliaduringCOVID-19.InternationalJournalofEnvironmental Research and Public Health,18(3), 866. Lee,S.,&Waters,S.F.(2021).AsiansandAsianAmericansâexperiencesofracial discrimination during the COVID-19 pandemic: Impacts on health outcomes and the buffering role of social support.Stigma and Health,6(1), 70. Li, Y., & Mutchler, J. E. (2020). Older adults and the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.Journal of Aging & Social Policy,32(4-5), 477-487. SandĂn, B. and et.al. (2020). Psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic: Negative and positive effects in Spanish population during the mandatory national quarantine.Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Psychology,25(1), 1-21. Vazquez-Vazquez,A.andet.al.(2021).TheimpactoftheCovid-19lockdownonthe experiences and feeding practices of new mothers in the UK: Preliminary data from the COVID-19 New Mum Study.Appetite,156, 104985. Online TheLivedExperienceofCOVID-19.2021.[Online].AvailableThrough: <https://www.npjournal.org/article/S1555-4155(21)00177-X/fulltext>