Research Paper Critique

Running head: RESEARCH PAPER CRITIQUE 1
Research Paper Critique
Name
Institution

RESEARCH PAPER CRITIQUE 2
Research Paper Critique
It is important to point out that many experts write articles with a motive of improving
their respective fields of expertise. The written articles may have their strengths as well as
shortcomings. The article “High nutrition risk related to dietary intake is associated with an
increased risk of hospitalization and mortality for older Māori” by North et al., (2018) had a
similar motive. It sought to address the plight of the older Māori by addressing the issue of high
nutrition risk which they faced. This paper intends to point out the strength as well as
shortcomings of the article in the methods and results sections given that there the most
important parts of a research article. It also will discuss the general impression of the article as
well as the broad impact on nursing practice in New Zealand.
In the methods section, the description of the sample in terms of size for the main
experiment and the control is well done. The idea of using a large sample size was a good one
given that it increases precision as compared to a small sample (Thomas, Nelson & Silverman,
2018). Although well captured, the decision to use different sample sizes for the experiment and
the control was not the best (McKim, 2017). It could have been better if both sets of experiments
used equal sample sizes. The description of the respective characteristics of the samples is well
done for both groups in the study. How they arrived at the sample as well as the recruitment
procedure is well explained to a satisfactory level (Lipp & Fothergill, 2015). As far as
inducements are concerned, the study never used any going by the turnout of 57 percent. In a
nutshell, the researchers did a relatively good job in terms of coming up with the sample.
The materials which the researchers used to collect data were quite appropriate.
Administering a questionnaire to collect data ensures there is credibility given that it is first-hand
data. The secondary data from the ministry of health was also reliable considering it is from a

RESEARCH PAPER CRITIQUE 3
reputable government institution. The description of the various instruments used to measure the
multiple variables of the study has been done well in the methods section. They were also
appropriate in estimating the respective variables. However, the researchers failed to show the
reliability and validity of the instruments used in the study. In a nutshell, the data used in the
study were reliable. When it comes to the instruments, the researchers needed to provide
information to sufficiently show their reliability as well as validity.
The description of the design of the study is not well done in the methods section. What
the researchers did was mere stating of how they used the various tests to come up with the
results. It would have been better if the researchers clearly stated the design clearly so that it
would be easy for a busy reader going through the study to capture (Milne, 2016). Even though
the design is not very clear, it was entirely appropriate considering the research problem. The
Mann-Whitney test was crucial in helping to determine the difference between various groupings
in the study. Apart from Whitney test, all other tests conducted were also crucial in trying to
establish the correlation as well as associations between variables (Khamisa, Oldenburg, Peltzer
& Ilic, 2015). However, the researchers failed to describe how the various tests were done.
Overall the researcher did a relatively good job except for a few shortcomings evident in the
methods section.
In the results section, the display of results of both groups from the analysis are well
arranged. It is easy for a reader to interpret the result easily given that the results for both Maori
and Non-Maori are shown in a parallel manner. The researchers have also shown the various
results of statistical aspects of the data by doing some basic as well as advanced analysis. The
idea of discussing the results was a noble one given that it is not easy for a layman to understand
the figures displayed in the tables (Chen & Wang, 2016). It also makes it easy for a busy reader