Critical Evaluation of Research: HLSC122 Assessment 3, Semester 1

This report presents a critical appraisal of a research paper by Day et al. (2018), focusing on drug testing services at music festivals and their impact on illicit drug use among young people. The report evaluates the research's authorship, research questions, design, methods, and results, identifying both strengths and limitations. The study employed a cross-sectional survey to investigate drug use patterns and attitudes towards drug testing among music festival attendees. The report highlights the clinical significance of the findings, which support drug testing as a harm reduction strategy. However, it also acknowledges limitations such as convenience sampling and potential biases. Furthermore, the report applies the research findings to a case scenario involving concerns about drug use at music festivals, discussing enablers and barriers to implementing the evidence in practice. The conclusion emphasizes the need to consider these factors before applying the research in real-world settings, particularly addressing institutional and personal barriers to facilitate evidence-based practice.

Running head: CRITICAL EVALUATION
Title
Student name:
Student number:
HLSC122 Semester 1, 2019
Assessment 3: Critical appraisal of evidence
Word count:

1CRITICAL EVALUATION
Introduction
Critical appraisal is a crucial skill in evidence based practice to review all the important
stages of a research process and comment on the quality and validity of research design based on
use of research question, rationale for research, sample recruitment, research design, data analysis
and results (Liamputtong, 2010). This process supports taking decision regarding the application of
research evidence in real practice setting. This paper is based on the scenario of Emily who will be
going to visit a music festival in Melbourne and the concern of her mother who believed that drug
testing in such festival promotes illicit drug use among teenagers. Therefore, to find answers to the
research question, the main purpose of this report is to critically appraise research by Day et al.
(2018) and find whether the finding can address the concern faced by Emily’s mother in the scenario
or not.
PART A – Critical appraisal
Authorship
Authorship is an important feature in research articles which gives insight about status of
authors and those who deserves credit based on affiliation and qualification. For a good quality of a
research paper, details about authorship are critical to promote transparency in the research paper
(Moustafa, 2016). By the review of authorship details in the research paper, it can be said that the
author have affiliation from reputable institutes or programs which demonstrates their expertise and
knowledge in the related topic of interest. For example, most of the authors have affiliation with
School of Medicine and University Centre for Rural Health. This demonstrates clinical knowledge
regarding factors affecting health and strategies to promote health in diverse population groups.
This detail adds value to the research paper as they demonstrated credibility and scientific
contribution of authors in their field of research (Greenhalgh et al., 2016).
Research questions

2CRITICAL EVALUATION
To promote credibility in a research article, it is necessary to clearly report about purpose of
study, logical reason behind conducting the research and research question of interest for the study
(Coughlan, Cronin & Ryan, 2007). The aim of the study by Day et al. (2018) was to assess whether
drug testing services in music festival can act as good control mechanism for drug dealers and
reducing harmful drug behavior among youths or not. The rationale for research in this area was
discussed in the paper by giving statistical evidence related to use of illicit drug use in Australian
teenagers and the vulnerability of music festival attendees in engaging in high consumption of illicit
drug. The study justified the need to reduce drug behavior in this population group by reporting
about risk associated with illicit drug use in the group such as incidence of adverse side effects like
hyperthermia, seizures, multi-organ failure and even death. As part of harm reduction strategy, the
evaluation of drug testing services in music festival was appropriate.
Research design
To investigate about patterns and perception related to drug use and drug testing among
music festival attendees, the study used cross sectional survey design to investigate about the
research topic. The approach used was quantitative and data related to proportion and pattern of
illicit drug use among youths was collected from a subset of music festival attendees for 2 days. The
author did not justified the reason behind choosing cross sectional research design. Despite this, the
research design chosen is appropriate because cross-sectional research design is used to investigate
about a phenomenon in a population group at particular time. It also favors analysis of multiple
variables at the same time. Therefore, as the study aimed to collect data on drug use pattern,
perception about drug testing and its impact on drug abuse behavior, this study design is effective in
analyzing multiple variables at the same time. Another advantage of using cross-sectional research
design is that this type of research can be done in a fast paced manner without taking extra time and
cost (Nardi, 2018).

3CRITICAL EVALUATION
Research methods
The quality of research method used is understood from the review of sample recruitment
technique, data collection and data analysis method in the paper. The research was done in music
festival attendees between 18 to 30 years old. Apart from age, no other criteria were used for
sample recruitment. As the samples were from Australian music festival, it can be said that
convenience sampling strategy was used for data collection. This may contribute to biases as there
are chances of poor representation of the target population of interest (Greenhalgh et al., 2016).
However, ethical considerations related to informed consent and confidentiality of sample group
during research was maintained. As it was a quantitative research, survey method was used for data
collection. The quality and validity of the survey was enhanced by author’s justification regarding the
use of past survey to inform the structure of the survey. Close ended questions was used for survey
except one open ended question. One inaccuracy found in data collection is lack of reporting
regarding scores used to collect data regarding close ended question. However, considering use of
SPSS and p-value is the strength of the paper as it favored making proper judgment regarding the
clinical significance of the research findings.
Results and limitations
The results of the findings are clinically significant as it gave answer to the research question
and revealed that drug testing is important harm reduction strategy to influence drug use behavior
among youths. Hence, the research question was addressed. However, some limitations that
affects the reliability of the work is use of convenience sampling technique that may contribute to
bias. In addition, the study also had majority of female respondent which might confound study
result and limit the generalizability of the findings for other population group.
Part B-Application of evidence to practice

4CRITICAL EVALUATION
From the critical appraisal of the research paper, drug testing centers in music festivals have
been identified as an important strategy to prevent illicit drug use. Hence, the article can be applied
in the scenario as it will address Emily’s mother concern regarding the benefit of drug testing on
illicit drug use behavior. This will develop the perspective that such drug testing units are effective
harm reduction strategy to promote health of teenagers. The article is also relevant to be applied in
practical setting to reduce the harm effect of drug use on teenagers. This is because the paper shows
the benefit of drug testing centers in reducing consumption of harmful drugs and will act as quality
control mechanism for drug dealers. However, some of the barrier to the application of evidence
includes institutional barriers such as lack of resource to establish such centers and lack of trained
staffs to conduct drug testing.
Conclusion:
From the critical appraisal of research paper, it can be said that the study was successful in
answering the research question and giving the idea that drug testing centers prevent illicit drug
amongst teenagers. However, the critical evaluation helped to identify some biases in the paper in
the area of sample recruitment and reporting about data collection method. These biases should be
considered before applying such evidence in real practice settings. The article is found relevant to
address the concern for the case scenario of Emily too. To practically utilize the benefit of drug
testing centers in clinical settings, there is a need to consider institutional barriers and person
barriers too before engaging in evidence based practice.

5CRITICAL EVALUATION
References:
Coughlan, M., Cronin, P., & Ryan, F. (2007). Step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 1:
quantitative research. British journal of nursing, 16(11), 658-663.
Day, N., Criss, J., Griffiths, B., Gujral, S. K., John-Leader, F., Johnston, J., & Pit, S. (2018). Music festival
attendees’ illicit drug use, knowledge and practices regarding drug content and purity: a
cross-sectional survey. Harm reduction journal, 15(1), 1.
Greenhalgh, T., Bidewell, J., Crisp, E., Lambros, A., & Warland, J. (2016). Understanding Research
Methods for Evidence-Based Practice in Health 1e. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral-
proquest-com.ezproxy1.acu.edu.au
Liamputtong, P. (2010). Research methods in health: foundations for evidence-based practice.
Retrieved from: https://researchdirect.westernsydney.edu.au/islandora/object/uws:40987/
Moustafa, K. (2016). Contributorships are not ‘weighable’to be equal. Trends in biochemical
sciences, 41(5), 389-390.
Nardi, P. M. (2018). Doing survey research: A guide to quantitative methods. Routledge.

6CRITICAL EVALUATION
References: