Exploring Perspectives of Allied Health Practitioners on Journal Clubs

Running head: EVIDENCE BASED RESEARCH
EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author note:

1EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE
Introduction
Evidence based practice aids in development of nursing knowledge and future
professional development (Kalb et al., 2015). In this paper, the article by Lizarondo, Grimmer-
Somers and Kumar (2011) will be critiqued using the guideline outlined in Houser (2018).
Discussion
Credibility
The authors are academicians belonging to the evidence based research department of a
notable Australian university, hence indicating academic credibility. From further reading, it can
also be observed that the authors have no conflict of interest hence indicating absence of a
possibility of bias (Houser, 2018). The article is peer reviewed as observed in the sequential
numbering of pages, presence of a volume and issue number and publishing in a peer-reviewed
journal (Lizarondo, Grimmer-Somers & Kumar, 2011). There is however no mention of a date of
review or any mentioning of an external editorial board, hence raising few doubts on research
credibility. However, it can observed that the article’s time frame for publishing is reasonable
and is indicative of a gap of approximately two months. There is however no evidence on
presence of financial connections between the publication of study results. Hence, while this
article seems to be credible for evidence based practice, not fulfilling certain criteria raises
questions on credibility (Lockwood, Munn & Porritt, 2015).
Problem Statement
Upon observing the article’s problem statement, it can be observed that the authors
employed a deductive approach by highlighting a general overview on journal clubs and then

2EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE
narrowing it down to a specific issue of observing perspectives of health practitioners on the
same (Lizarondo, Grimmer-Somers & Kumar, 2011). Problems concerning viability and
acceptability of journal clubs have been clearly highlighted. However, despite highlighting clear
information on concerns associated with journal clubs in evidence based practice and clearly
outlining of the problem statement, the latter was difficult to search and identify due to lack of
appropriate segregation (Houser, 2018). This can be considered as a limitation of in terms of
understanding and comprehension. The study also articulates its significance by highlighting the
adopting a collaborative approach in journal clubs and research discussion and improve evidence
based practice and healthcare change - which are key aspects of nursing professional practice.
However, the same could only be found after extensive reading hence hindering ease in
readability (Butler, Hall & Copnell, 2016).
Ethical Issues
Upon extensive evaluation of the study, no information could be obtained based on
whether the participants’ consent was obtained prior to study recruitment, along with no mention
on the protection of any vulnerable groups or the usage of a risk assessment. There was no
mention of compliance to or ethical documentation of approval from the IRB (Houser, 2018).
These can be considered as major limitations since lack of obtaining participant consent or
conductance of any risk assessment raises questions on the study’s compliance ethical and
humanitarian standards. However, highlighting the presence of an ethical approval from an ethics
committee along with mentioning that interested participants were only selected may indicate
obtaining consent, ethical compliance and non-disclosure (Lizarondo, Grimmer-Somers &
Kumar, 2011). It was also mentioned that debriefing was conducted after every focus group