Critical Appraisal of Articles 2022

Running head: CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF ARTICLES
Critical Appraisal of Articles
HSH7xx: Unit name
Unit chair: Name of unit chair
Author: Your name and ID
Date submitted: dd/mm/yy
Word count: xxx words (excluding reference list)

Your ID: Your name
Table of Contents
Introduction.................................................................................................2
Selection of Tool..........................................................................................2
Critical Appraisal.........................................................................................2
Critical Appraisal of RCT study by using CASP.........................................2
Critical Appraisal of Qualitative Study by CASP Tool................................5
Ethical Issues...............................................................................................7
Summary of Appraised Papers....................................................................8
References..................................................................................................9

Your ID: Your name
Introduction
The issue of public health problem is one of the most crucial issues
for the modern society as day by day different types of public health
problems are affecting the society. As a part of this, it is observed that
issue of diabetes is a common public health problem around the world and
thus it can affect a huge number of people in the society irrespective of
age and gender of the people (Fenwick et al. 2018). In this present essay,
two articles are appraised in a critical manner. Among the two articles,
one is clearly focusing on the issue of diabetes mellitus among the people
and on the other hand, the other article discusses about the behaviours of
the human being regarding the less consumption of discretionary food
during fruit and vegetable consumption.
Selection of Tool
The selection of the critical appraisal tool for evaluating the articles
is very crucial and it can help the researchers to evaluate the quality of
the study. According to the study of Nadelson and Nadelson (2014; p-344),
it is stated that the use of CASP tool for appraising scientific articles is
validated by the researchers around the world and thus the selection of
this tool as a part of the critical appraisal is quite justified. Therefore, the
use of CASP is very important in this scenario as it helps in proper
criticism of the articles.
Critical Appraisal
Critical Appraisal of RCT study by using CASP
The study of Opie et al. used a randomized control study method for
identifying the reasons of less consumption of discretionary foods during
the promotion of vegetables and fruits. From the study it can be stated
that the study Cleary addressed the primary issue of the study. In this RCT
study, secondary analysis of data of the data from the ShopSmart study,

Your ID: Your name
that included a 6-month intervention for promoting the consumption of
fruit and vegetables (Opie et al. 2019, p-1).
While discussing about the randomization of the study, it can be
stated that the study participants were randomly assigned to the
behavioural intervention (n 124) or the control (n 124) (Opie et al. 2019,p-
3). In this case, it can be stated that in the intervention group almost 124
women were recruited and in the control group was also 124. In this
process of randomization, computer generated block randomization
sequence was used by an independent statistician as a part of maintain
the process of randomization. According to the study of Watson (2015, p-
44), it is reported that in order to maintain the proper randomization
throughout the study the researchers followed all the steps of
randomization. From the study method, it was observed that allocation
sequence was not revealed to the researchers or to the participants as
well and an independent statistician performed the process of allocation
of the participants to each of the groups.
All the participants who were allocated to the study did not
complete the study. In this regard, it can be stated that initially 248
participants were assigned to the study. During the post intervention
procedure, one individual discontinued the study intervention from the
intervention group and on the other hand 3 people opted out from the
study from the control groups. Along with this, during the 6 months post
intervention process, from the intervention group, 5 people were reported
to be lost to follow up from the study and one individual withdrew
themselves from the study. In case of the control group of the study, only
118 people completed the 6 months intervention process and only 3
people were reported to be lost to follow up (Opie et al. 2019). During the
data analysis process, data of 116 people from the intervention groups
were analysed and during this time, data of one individual was lost and so
that data was excluded from the final analysis. In case of the control
group, data of 109 people were analysed and in this group data of 9
individuals were lost and so they are excluded from the final data analysis