Discuss the quality of the abstract (purpose, design, sample, intervention, and key results presented).

– Skim the entire instructor-assigned research article.
-re-read carefully the introduction/literature review /theoretical framework and methods sections of the article
– Research Article Appraisal, Part One Assignment is to find the best answer to each question based on your Gray and Grove (2021) and on what you have read in the instructor assigned research article.
– Look up key terms from the questions in your textbook. Some examples of these terms might be problem statements, hypotheses, or variables. You can also look in Chapter 18 for an example of a critical appraisal of a quantitative research article.
-You will write your answers for this assignment using the paper guideline found below. Leave the questions in your assignment and answer them accordingly. Do not write as a paper. Use complete sentences and correct grammar. NO QUOTES ARE ALLOWED IN THIS ASSIGNMENT as this is to be your appraisal of the content. Refer to APA to assist you. Answer every question. Cite the article at least once.

Your assigned article for an appraisal is:
Levey, J. (2020). Teaching online graduate nursing students cultural diversity from an ethnic and nonethnic perspective.
Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 31(2), 202208. DOI: 10.1177/1043659619868760

QUESTIONS TO ANSWER: SEE BELOW

Your guideline for this weeks appraisal is here:
Research Article Appraisal, Part One
Research Article Appraisal, Part One

Authors, Title, and Abstract
1. Discuss author(s) qualifications to conduct the study, including educational preparation (PhD, MSN, etc.) and clinical experience of author[s].

2. Discuss the clarity of the article title (type of study, variables, and population stated).

3. Discuss the quality of the abstract (purpose, design, sample, intervention, and key results presented).

Literature Review/Background
1. Briefly state the clinical problem that prompted the study.

2. Discuss the data provided for the significance of the clinical problem, and why you believe it is an important problem for nursing science. If you believe it is not an important problem, then explain why not.

3. Identify the major topics discussed in the background section and evaluate whether there were any missing ideas or topics.

4. Briefly explain whether the background section included sources current at the time of the study (ie. within 5 years of publication).

5. Discuss whether previous studies were critically evaluated by the study authors to provide a clear summary of the current knowledge about the problem of interest.

6. Evaluate whether the background section provided enough support for the current research study. In other words, whether gaps in research knowledge were clearly described.

Research Purpose & Research Questions/Hypotheses
1. State the study purpose and evaluate whether the purpose clearly addresses the gap in nursing knowledge identified in the background section.

2. If there are research questions and/or hypotheses, list them, and discuss whether they logically follow from the research problem and purpose. If questions/hypotheses were only implied, rather than explicitly stated, describe that.

Theory Framework
1. Describe the theory/framework that supported the study. List the important concepts in the theory framework as described by the authors.

2. Evaluate the clarity of the presentation of the framework. If it was vague or had missing elements, describe those.

3. Discuss how well the theory/framework concepts were clearly linked to the study variables (the things that were actually measured in the study).

1. List the major study variables [NOT demographic variables]. Categorize them as research, independent, or dependent variables.

2. List the demographic variables measured in the study, and any extraneous variables identified by the authors. Evaluate whether there are missing demographic variables, in your opinion.

Research Design
1. Identify the specific study design. Explain how the design was appropriate to answer the studys research questions or hypotheses.

2. Briefly describe the study procedures, including recruitment, screening for eligibility, consent, timing & method of measurement of all variables, and intervention if applicable.

3. Discuss the clarity of description of study procedures. In other words, could another researcher replicate the study using the procedure described in the article?

4. If more than one group was included in the study, explain how participants were assigned to groups.

5. Describe any threats to design validity mentioned by the authors, usually in the limitations section.

6. Describe the generalizability of the study, or to what populations the findings could be applied.

Population, Sample, & Setting
1. What was the population for the study?

2. Identify the specific sampling method used for the study (i.e. bringing subjects into the study). Discuss how well this sampling method produces a sample representative of the population.

3. Identify and evaluate the inclusion and exclusion criteria used in the study. Describe any missing criteria that you believe should be there.

4. Discuss how the planned sample size was determined (including power analysis & consideration of potential attrition if included).

5. Discuss actual sample size attained for the study, including acceptance rate or refusal rate, and attrition rate if provided, or if you calculated them.

6. Describe the study setting [hospital, clinic, home, or other] and its appropriateness for the study.

Reference List

Rubric
Research Appraisal, Part One
Research Appraisal, Part One
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction 10 to >8.0 pts
Accomplished
Qualifications of the authors are noted as found in the article (did educational preparation and clinical experience of the author[s] support qualification to conduct the study?). (3 pts) The title is discussed in terms of the type of study, variables, and population. (3 pts) All elements included in the abstract discussed: purpose, design, sample, interventions and key results if applicable. (3 pts) Cited appropriately. (1 pt) 8 to >3.0 pts
Competent
Only partial discussion of qualifications noted. Title discussion not complete. Missing elements of the abstract not discussed. 3 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
Improvement Qualifications not mentioned or incorrect. Title not discussed Abstract not discussed.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLiterature Review 15 to >12.0 pts
Accomplished
Identifies and discusses clinical problem and evidence of significance to nursing. (3 pts) More than one major topic in the background. (3 pts) Are the sources current? (2 pts) Were the articles used in the ROL appraised give examples (was a summary noted of the articles)? (4 pts) Was a gap in the literature addressed? (3 pts) 12 to >8.0 pts
Competent
Less than two topics discussed. Vague explanation of how ROL describes current knowledge of the research problem. Inadequate discussion of how are summarized. 8 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
No topics identified in the ROL. No explanation of how ROL describes current knowledge of the research problem. No discussion or vagueness of the ROL studies being summarized. No examples.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeResearch Problem, Purpose, Research Questions/Hypotheses 10 to >8.0 pts
Accomplished
Identify the research problem of the study. (3 pt) Identify the study purpose. Does the purpose clearly address a gap in nursing knowledge (research problem) identified in and supported by the ROL? (3 pts) If there are research questions and/or hypotheses, identify them and discuss whether they follow from the research problem and purpose? (3 pts) State whether each of these were implied or explicitly stated. (1 pt) 8 to >3.0 pts
Competent
Problem or purpose statement incorrect. Incorrect questions or hypotheses given. 3 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
No attempt at identifying problem, purpose statement or question/hypotheses.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTheoretical Framework 10 to >8.0 pts
Accomplished
Adequate description of the framework. (3 pts) Is it implicit or explicit? (1 pt) List the important concepts within the framework. (2 pts) Gives at least one example of a relationship among two of the concepts (2 pts). Identifies if there is a map or model in the article (2 pts) 8 to >3.0 pts
Competent
Does not describe the framework adequately. There are missing concepts of the framework. No relationships among variables described. No map or model identified or discussed. 3 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
The framework is not identified or described. No framework concepts listed. No maps or models are discussed.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeVariables 15 to >12.0 pts
Accomplished
Major variables are identified. (4 pts) Correct variable labels (IV, DV, RV) (3 pts) List the demographic variables. (4 pts) Discussion of extraneous variables from authors perspective found in the study (this is not your opinion) (4 pts) 12 to >8.0 pts
Competent
Missing one major variable. Incorrect label of variables Missing/incorrect conceptual definition of a variable Missing/incorrect of an operational definition. Missing one or more demographic variables. Missing one or more extraneous variables. 8 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
No specific labels of variables (RV,DV,IV) No conceptual definitions No operational definitions No demographic variables listed, or vague discussion of them. No extraneous variables identified.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeResearch Design 20 to >16.0 pts
Accomplished
Correct design type was selected. (4 pts) Explanation of how the design type matches the studys objective, question, or hypotheses. (1 pt) Explanation of how the design type provides a means to examine the studys purpose. (1 pts) Describe the study procedures (including recruitment, screening for eligibility, consent, timing & method of measurement of demographic & key study variables, and intervention if applicable). (5 pts) Was the description of the study clear enough to be replicated? (1 pt) Describe the groups, how were they assigned (if applicable). (4 pts )Were the extraneous variables identified and controlled (not your opinion, but what the author says) (2 pts) What are the limits to generalizability (external validity). (2 pts) 16 to >8.0 pts
Competent
Incorrect design. Missing elements of the study procedure. Inadequate discussion of groups. Limitations of the study missing. 8 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
No attempt at identifying design type. Study procedure poorly described. Limitations of the study not discussed.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting Style & Format 10 to >8.0 pts
Accomplished
Keep the questions in the assignment, Use professional and orderly presentation of ideas (full sentences, precision, clarity, format, grammar, spelling, & punctuation) with appropriate citation of sources. NO QUOTES WILL BE USED IN THIS ASSIGNMENT. Up to 0.5 points will be deducted for each grammar, spelling, punctuation, or format error. Content errors will be greater point deduction. 8 to >3.0 pts
Competent
Missing elements of APA. Paper too long. 3 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePopulation, Sample, & Setting 10 to >8.0 pts
Accomplished
Identify the specific sampling method used for the study. 2 points Discuss the adequacy of the sampling method for producing a sample representative of the population. Discuss potential biases with the sampling method used. 1 pt. Identify the inclusion and exclusion criteria used in the study. 2 pts Discuss the appropriateness of the sampling criteria for the study? 1 pt Discuss how the planned sample size was determined (including power analysis & consideration of potential attrition if included). 2 pts Discuss actual sample size attained for the study including acceptance rate, refusal rate (including rationale for refusal to participate if presented), and attrition rate. 2 pt Describe study setting and its appropriateness for the study. 1 pt 8 to >3.0 pts
Competent
Missing elements of population, sample, or setting. 3 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
10 pts

Last Completed Projects