Critically appraising qualitative research PDF

Running head: CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
Critical appraisal of qualitative research
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note:

1
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
Table of Contents
Question 3:.................................................................................................................................3
Question 4:.................................................................................................................................3
Question 5:.................................................................................................................................4
Question 8:.................................................................................................................................5
Question 9:.................................................................................................................................5
Question 10:...............................................................................................................................6

2
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
Question 3:
Research designs are a very important aspect of research study. As mentioned by the
authors, it is crucial for the study design selected to align well with the research question
being asked in the study (Vassallo 2018). The possibility of a research study to yield fruitless
results are extremely high in case the design had not been appropriate for the topic area of the
research. Moreover, while deciding on the research design of the study, it is also crucial to
take into consideration the area of interest for the study and the exact aims and objectives that
the study is aiming to achieve (Taylor, Bogdan and DeVault 2015). In this case, the study
chosen focuses on the views of the elderly patient populations regarding the presence of
dignity in the acute care health facilities with respect to the perception of the health care
professionals regarding the same (Tauber‐Gilmore et al. 2018).
Hence, it has to be acknowledged in this context that the research study focuses
entirely on exploring the perception of the target populations with respect to their experiences
in the past with acute care facilities and whether the aspect of dignity is respected there for
frail and critically ill elderly patient populations requiring a varied range of assistive support
to living (Tauber‐Gilmore et al. 2018). Hence, it is very important to capture the feelings and
thoughts of the target population in the study to achieve the aims and objectives. The research
study design selected for the article by the authors has been qualitative research using
interviews as the data collection process which will capture the individual feelings and
thoughts effectively. The authors have also justified the use of the qualitative research design
using verbatim semi structured interviews. Hence, it can be considered that the research
design selected was appropriate for addressing the research aims and objectives (Barclay
2016).

3
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
Question 4:
Another very important aspect of a research study to be high in quality is the sampling
and recruitment being employed in the research design (Merriam and Tisdell 2015). There is
a varied range of sampling and recruitment methods, each apt for different study designs
complimenting the process to be followed efficiently. For this research study, Tauber‐
Gilmore et al. (2018) have employed the design of purposive sampling for the study.
Purposive sampling can be defined as a non-probability sampling where the participants are
selected for the study based on the population characteristics and the aim or objective of the
study (Anney 2014). Hence, it can be stated that this is a selective and subjective sampling
where the recruitment is based on the exact characteristic need of the study aim. This research
study focuses entirely on the perception of a target population of elderly patients in acute care
and their health care professionals, hence the selective sampling technique is apt (Benoot,
Hannes and Bilsen 2016). Although, the researchers have only provided the details of the
exact selection technique opted as snowballing technique, however, there had not been any
rationale justifying the choice. As per the Tauber‐Gilmore et al. (2018), the student nurses,
healthcare assistants and ward administrator were excluded from the study, however,
justification was not provided for this exclusion either. Hence, although purposeful sampling
had been appropriate for a qualitative research like this one, it is unclear whether it exactly
matched the aim of the research due to the lack of justifications provided.
Question 5:
The data that had been collected for this research study had been interview data, and it
had been collected in the verbatim manner during the semi-structured interviews (Tauber‐
Gilmore et al. 2018). The authors have provided a separate section as the data collection
where the details are illustrated. The authors have also clearly mentioned that the data
collection method had been semi structured interviews conducted at a mutually agreed venue

4
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
and time. Although, the authors have not provided any rationale justifying the choice of the
data collection method chosen. Although the method of the interviews were described
efficiently, but there have not been any choice of topic guide mentioned as well. The methods
chosen in the initial phase had not been changed or modified in any manner during the study
which is undoubtedly a very important strength of the article (Holloway and Galvin 2016).
The form of data is also clearly mentioned which had been audio recordings and the authors
have also discussed addressing all the topics in every interview and continuing to recruit
interviewees until apparent data saturation was reached. Hence, the data had been collected in
a way that addressed the research question.
Question 8:
The data analysis process had been clearly and succinctly mentioned right after the
data collection segment in the article which is extremely convenient for the readers (Tauber‐
Gilmore et al. 2018). It also needs to be mentioned that the exact procedure details of the data
analysis that has been carried out is also clearly mentioned in the paper as well, which is
undoubtedly commendable. The five stages of the data analysis procedure as mentioned by
the authors include familiarisation with the data, Coding, Searching for the themes,
Reviewing themes, and Defining and naming themes. The thematic analysis had also been
used in the research study. However, there is no mentioning of how the data presented were
selected from the original sample to demonstrate the analysis process (Tauber‐Gilmore et al.
2018). Although sufficient data had been included in the analysis, there is no mentioning of
the whether any extent of contradictory data had been included in the process. Although an
ethical consideration is mentioned, there is no mentioning whether the researchers critically
examined their own role, potential bias and influence during analysis and selection of data for
presentation, which is a considerable flaw of the design (Tauber‐Gilmore et al. 2018). Hence,
the data analysis had not been rigorous enough.

5
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
Question 9:
The exact manner in which the findings are presented and illustrated in the research
study plays a fundamental role in deciding the quality and efficacy of the research study
(Whitehead, LoBiondo-Wood and Haber, 2012). The findings are explicitly mentioned using
different themes which is appropriate considering the qualitative research design of the study.
The results indicate that the aspect of dignity is broadly understood in terms of the meaning
of dignity, staffing level and its impact on dignity, and organisational culture and dignity.
Although there are considerable inconsistencies in the application of dignified care in the
acute care settings involving the elderly patients (Tauber‐Gilmore et al. 2018). A notable
strength of this paper can be considered the presence of supporting statement and arguments
balancing the relevance and authenticity of the findings. It also needs to be mentioned that the
findings have been co-related with the original research question as well. Hence, the findings
are adequately and systematically illustrated in the paper and there is clear statement of the
findings.
Question 10:
Considering the validity and reliability of the research findings, it has to be mentioned
that the area of research caters to a very important aspect of aged care (Ingham-Broomfield
2015). The research study had been successful in providing the details of how the need and
presence of dignity is perceived among the patients and the care professionals. The thematic
analysis method of the data presentation and discussion also services as a systematic debate
regarding the findings providing notable insights on the topic. As discussed by the Tauber‐
Gilmore et al. (2018), the most remarkable data discovered had been the fact that dignity is
perceived in terms of the meaning of dignity, staffing level and its impact on dignity, and
organisational culture and dignity, which had been the three main theme of the data findings,
which are noble insights in this context. Although, when one notable limitation of the

6
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
research study had been the limited transferability to new populations due to staff being
interviewed twice as many as patients, and they have not discussed new ways in which this
research can be conducted along with no new areas where further research is needed (Anney,
2014). Hence, it can be considered that overall the study provides a quality evidence that can
be applied to the practice with a few limitations, the research is valuable.

7
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
References:
Anney, V.N., 2014. Ensuring the quality of the findings of qualitative research: Looking at
trustworthiness criteria.
Barclay, L., 2016. In sickness and in dignity: A philosophical account of the meaning of
dignity in health care. International journal of nursing studies, 61, pp.136-141.
Benoot, C., Hannes, K. and Bilsen, J., 2016. The use of purposeful sampling in a qualitative
evidence synthesis: A worked example on sexual adjustment to a cancer trajectory. BMC
medical research methodology, 16(1), p.21.
Hirschi, T. and Selvin, H.C., 2017. Delinquency research: An appraisal of analytic methods.
Routledge.
Ingham-Broomfield, R., 2015. A nurses' guide to qualitative research. Australian Journal of
Advanced Nursing, The, 32(3), p.34.
Merriam, S.B. and Tisdell, E.J., 2015. Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. John Wiley & Sons.
Tauber‐Gilmore, M., Addis, G., Zahran, Z., Black, S., Baillie, L., Procter, S. and Norton, C.,
2018. The views of older people and health professionals about dignity in acute hospital
care. Journal of clinical nursing, 27(1-2), pp.223-234.
Taylor, S.J., Bogdan, R. and DeVault, M., 2015. Introduction to qualitative research
methods: A guidebook and resource. John Wiley & Sons.
Vassallo, J., 2018. WASP (Write a Scientific Paper): Critical appraisal of existing
research. Early human development, 127, pp.98-100.

8
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
Whitehead, D., LoBiondo-Wood, G. and Haber, J., 2012. Nursing and midwifery research:
Methods and critical appraisal for evidence-based practice. Elsevier Health Sciences.