Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study

Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

Nursing research has experienced remarkable growth, providing nurses with a growing evidence base from which to practice (Polit & Beck, 2017).  Qualitative data are collected in a natural setting and the data are not numerical: rather, they are full and rich descriptions from participants (Williamson, 2009). Quantitative research gathers numerical data that strongly influence the quality of the evidence in the study (Polit & Beck, 2017).A key methodologic distinction is between quantitative research, which is most closely allied with positivism, and qualitative research, which is associated with constructivist inquiry (Polit & Beck, 2017). The review of literature can be a valuable tool, to ensure that policies are developed based on a body of evidence that has been systematically synthesized and analyzed (Houde, 2009). Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study. Critiquing a study identifies areas of adequacy and inadequacy in an unbiased manner (Polit & Beck, 2017). The purpose of this paper is to review and critique two research articles, and to compare the advantages and disadvantages of the two articles.

BUY A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Research Articles

            The first article chose was a qualitative study in parental perceptions and understanding of SIDS-reduction guidance in a UK bi-cultural urban community by Denise Crane and Helen Ball, 2016. This study aimed to discover how white British and Pakistani mothers in Bradford recall, understand and interpret SIDS-guidance, and to explore whether and how they implement this guidance in caring for their infants (Crane & Ball, 2016). The study also aimed to elicit detailed qualitative explanations for inter-cultural differences in infant care in the Bradford community (Crane & Ball, 2016). In-depth narrative interviews were conducted to obtain data from mothers of 8-12 week old infants (Crane & Ball, 2016). Being a qualitative study, it reflected the real experience and viewpoints of participants.

The second article was a quantitative case-control study about the socioeconomic factors affecting infant sleep-related deaths in St. Louis by Cathy Hogan, 2014. The study was to identify or determine whether there is a relationship between maternal socioeconomic factors (race, poverty, maternal education, and parity) and sleep-related infant death. The study was conducted using secondary data analysis. The study involved two study populations and the data was collected from matched birth/death certificates and living birth certificates of infants who were born died within the time frame of the study. The study found a significant relationship between race and sleep-related infant death. The study involved numerical data that supported the hypothesis. Being a quantitative study, results that support the researcher’s hypothesis are described as significant (Polit & Beck, 2017). Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

Advantages and Disadvantages

            Every method of study has its advantages and disadvantages. The first research article being a qualitative study about the parental perceptions and understanding of SIDS-reduction and guidance mainly aimed at identifying the practices and cultural influences of the mothers in taking care of the infants. The study includes narrative interviews of mothers that helped collect data focusing on understanding the human experience as it is lived (Crane & Ball, 2016). The study emphasized on the dynamic, holistic, and individual aspects of mothers while taking care of their infants (Crane & Ball, 2016). Findings from this study is typically grounded in the real-life experiences of people with first-hand knowledge (Polit & Beck, 2017). This helped to gain a better knowledge of the phenomena. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study. The study also provided suggestions for individually tailored approaches for SIDS-reduction (Crane & Ball, 2016). The disadvantage of this particular study was a small sample size and the study being, limited to one group of community.

            The second study was a quantitative study about the socioeconomic factors affecting infant sleep-related death. This quantitative research was mainly numerical and pointed to objectivity. Also the research had a constructed a theory/framework, that helped the researcher work around it. Secondary data analysis of birth/death certificates and living birth certificates of infants born/died within the time frame, was used in this study (Hogan, 2014). So there was no direct involvement of the human subjects. Numerical data and tables was presented throughout the study. The disadvantages of the study includes the study population which mainly included the African American community (Hogan, 2014). This might have limited the generalizability of the findings. The sample size was information on 26,211 individuals in a 4 year period (2005-2009), which might have consumed the time frame of the study Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

Qualitative Research not Real Science

Response to claim qualitative research not real science can be answered different ways by people. Qualitative research is always valued for its relevance, but is considered lacking in scientific accuracy. Qualitative researchers undertake in-depth studies that usually reveals pattern and processes suggesting casual interpretations which will need more systematic testing with controlled methods of inquiry (Polit & Beck, 2017). Qualitative research does not have standard rules or procedures that makes the researcher hard to explain how to do analyses. Qualitative and quantitative researches provide outcomes in their own ways that is important to the researches. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.  Quantitative data mainly provides numerical data and include a hypothesis to work towards the directions (Eliyahu, 2014). Qualitative research will serve the research with descriptive goals, while the quantitative research will deliver specific variable measures (Sinaga, 2014). The insights of these two studies can help the researchers chose which is the best and appropriate design for the study.

Conclusion

            Understanding the factors that causes the increasing rates of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome is very important for the reduction rates. The two articles critiqued in this paper shows the factors causing the infant sleep-related deaths. Analyzing the different methods of research used in the articles reviewed helps to learn more about the two designs of the study, qualitative and quantitative study. Study designs discovers significant amount of information about the researches. Qualitative study is subjective and quantitative study is analyzed through statistical means (Polit & Beck, 2017). Knowing the different methods of designs used in research helps the researchers choose a better one for any new research. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

 

References

Crane, D., & Ball, H. L. (2016). A qualitative study in parental perceptions and understanding

of SIDS-reduction guidance in a UK bi-cultural community. BMC Pediatrics, 161. doi: 10.1186/s12887-016-0560-7

Eliyahu, A. (2014). Understanding different types of research: The difference between

qualitative and quantitative approaches. Retrieved from: http://chronicle.umbmentoring.org/on-methods-whats-the-difference-between-qualitataive-and-quantitative-approaches/

Hogan. C. (2014). Socioeconomic Factors Affecting Infant Sleep-Related Deaths in St. Louis.

Public Health Nursing. 31(1), 10-18. doi: 10.1111/phn.12052

Houde, S. C. (2009). The systematic review of literature: A tool for evidence-based policy.

Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 35(9), 9-12. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2012). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for

nursing practice (9th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer

Sinaga, A. M. H. P. (2014). Differences Between Qualitative And Quantitative Analysis And

How It Should Be Applied In Our Research. Retrieved from:  http://www.academia.edu/10722206/Difference_Between_Qualitative_And_Quantitative_Analysis_And_How_It_Should_Be_Applied_In_Our_Research

Williamson, K. M. (2009). Evidence-based practice: Critical appraisal of qualitative evidence.

Journal of the American Psychiatric Association, 15(3), 202-207. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

 

Critique Template for a Quantitative Study

NURS 5052/NURS 6052

Week 6 Assignment: Application: Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies (due by Day 7 of Week 7)

Date: 10/15/2017

Your name: Sandhya Thomas

Article reference (in APA style): Hogan. C. (2014). Socioeconomic Factors Affecting Infant Sleep-Related Deaths in St. Louis. Public Health Nursing. 31(1), 10-18. doi: 10.1111/phn.12052

URL: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/doi/10.1111/phn.12052/epdf

 

What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these:

 

  • Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation?
  • What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness?
  • How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice?

 

To help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods research study of your choice.

 

If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor.

  

QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE

 

  1. Research Problem and Purpose

 

What are the problem and purpose of the referenced study? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the problem must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.) Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study. 

Though the Back to Sleep Campaign that began in 1994 caused an overall decrease in sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) rates, racial disparity has continued to increase in St. Louis. The purpose of the study is to determine whether there is a relationship between maternal socioeconomic factors and sleep-related infant death in St. Louis.

 

  1. Hypotheses and Research Questions

 

What are the hypotheses (or research questions/objectives) of the study? (Sometimes the hypotheses or study questions are listed in the Results section, rather than preceding the report of the methodology used. Occasionally, there will be no mention of hypotheses, but anytime there are inferential statistics used, the reader can recognize what the hypotheses are from looking at the results of statistical analysis.) Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

 

The research question was,” Is there a relationship between socioeconomic factors (level of poverty, race, level of education, and number of children born) pertaining to the mother and infant sleep-related deaths?”

  

  1. Literature Review

 What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current? Relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.)

 

The quality of the literature review was current and relevant. Citations are included in the literature review that shows evidence of the literature review. There is integration of current knowledge base regarding the research in the background section of the study. The literature review highlighted evidence of variables (level of poverty, race, level of education, and number of children born) that affect parental choices for infant safe sleep.

 

 

  1. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework

 

Is a theoretical or conceptual framework identified? If so, what is it? Is it a nursing framework or one drawn from another discipline? (Sometimes there is no explicitly identified theoretical or conceptual framework; in addition, many “nursing” research studies draw on a “borrowed” framework, e.g., stress, medical pathology, etc.)

 

The theoretical or conceptual framework was to determine whether there are modifiable factors that may reduce racial disparity and the tragedy of infant death. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

 

  1. Population

 

What population was sampled? How was the population sampled? Describe the method and criteria. How many subjects were in the sample?

 

There were two study populations. The study population of all mothers of infants younger than 1 year who resided in St. Louis, MO at the time of the infant’s birth and whose infants died in St. Louis between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2009 was included as the case set in analysis. The control population was a systematic sampling of all mothers who resided in St. Louis at the time of the infants’ birth and whose infants lived past their first year. The dataset collected included information on 26,211 individuals and represented all birth recorded in St. Louis, MO between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2009.  Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study. The sample includes matched birth/death certificates and living birth certificates of infant’s who were born/died within the time frame.

 

  1. Protection of Human Research Participants

 

What steps were taken to protect human research subjects?

 

The study was an observational study using secondary data analysis. The Missouri DHSS institutional review board requirements were satisfied to obtain de-identified data.

 

  1. Research Design

 

What was the design of the study? If the design was modeled from previous research or pilot studies, please describe.

 

Quantitative case-control study used secondary data collected by the Missouri Department

Of Health and Senior Services between 2005 and 2009. Because this observational study compared cases where there was no death, a case-control study was appropriate. Since there was no control over the original data collection, the study falls into the category of observational studies using secondary data analysis.

 

  1. Instruments and Strategies for Measurement

 

What instruments and/or other measurement strategies were used in data collection? Was information provided regarding the reliability and validity of the measurement instruments? If so, describe it.

 

Matched birth/death data were coded according to International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. The database included information on the study’s outcome variable (whether they had a sleep-related death) and on demographic independent variables, such as mother’s race, whether she was married to the infant’s father, whether she received food stamps, years of education, and parity. The same independent variables were used in analysis if the infant death cases and the nondeath cases. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

 

  1. Data Collection

 

What procedures were used for data collection?

 

Data was collected through secondary data analysis from the matched birth/death data of infants between 2005 and 2009 in St. Louis, MO.

  1. Data Analysis

 

What methods of data analysis were used? Were they appropriate to the design and hypotheses?

 

Descriptive statistics and frequency distributions were generated for each variable. The case and control results were compared once the separate analyses was complete. Since the data being analyzed categorically, the technique of choice was logistic regression. The chi-square test was used to determine if there was a significant relationship between the categorical independent variables. A cross-tabulation was performed to determine the frequency with which the variables occur together. The methods used for data analysis was appropriate to the design and hypotheses.

 

  1. Interpretation of Results

 

What results were obtained from data analysis? Is sufficient information given to interpret the results of data analysis?

 

The results showed Caucasian mothers were significantly less likely than African American mothers (by a factor of OR = .228, p = .005) to experience sleep related infant death. Although poverty was significant in the chi-squared analysis, it was significant in logistic regression. Even though previous researches showed racial disparity regarding sleep-related infant deaths that occurred while co-sleeping, the data presented by the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services did not provide specific information about the individual deaths beyond unintentional suffocation Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

Sufficient information was given to interpret the results of the data analysis the study included tables of all the findings.

 

 

  1. Discussion of Findings

 

Was the discussion of findings related to the framework? Were those the expected findings?  Were they consistent with previous studies? Were serendipitous (i.e., accidental) findings described?

 

Discussion of findings was related to the framework. Previous research has suggested that socioeconomic factors have an impact on infant sleep-related deaths, this study found a significant relationship only between race and infant sleep-related death. So the study was not consistent with the previous studies. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

 

 

  1. Limitations

 

Did the researcher report limitations of the study? (Limitations are acknowledgments of internal characteristics of the study that may help explain insignificant and other unexpected findings, and more importantly, indicate those groups to whom the findings CANNOT be generalized or applied. It is a fact that all studies must be limited in some way; not all of the issues involved in a problem situation can be studied all at once.)

 

Researcher did report limitations for the study. The study population was a limitation, as it is a largely an African American community. The size of the sample may also limit the validity and the generalizability of the study. Although the sample for mothers who have experienced sleep-related infant deaths is a valid presentation, the sample taken from the mothers who have not experienced sleep-related infant deaths may provide an inaccurate basis for comparison, especially given the size of the sample in relation to the total population. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

 

  1. Implications

 

Are the conclusions and implications drawn by the author warranted by the study findings? (Sometimes researchers will seem to ignore findings that don’t confirm their hypotheses as they interpret the meaning of their study findings.)

 

The conclusions and implications drawn by the author are warranted by the study findings. The results of the study have a social change potential. This study provides evidence that there continues to be racial disparity in ST. Louis, Missouri despite messages of the Back to Sleep Campaign and drastic reductions in sleep-related deaths in Caucasian population. The findings from this study serve to inform the concerned offices that there is a specific demographic group for them to target and educate the dangers of sleep-related infant death. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

 

  1. Recommendations

 

Does the author offer legitimate recommendations for further research? Is the description of the study sufficiently clear and complete to allow replication of the study? (Sometimes researchers’ recommendations seem to come from “left field” rather than following obviously from the discussion of findings. If a research problem is truly significant, the results need to be confirmed with additional research; in addition, if a reader wishes to design a study using a different sample or correcting flaws in the original study, a complete description is necessary.)

 

Author does offers legitimate recommendations for further research. The study did not show significant relationship between maternal level of education, poverty and sleep-related deaths. There were limitations in the study, mainly being the size. Further research in a larger scale maybe beneficial. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

 

  1. Research Utilization in Your Practice

 

How might this research inform your practice? Are the research findings appropriate to your practice setting and situation? What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness? How might the utilization of this research trigger changes in other aspects of practice?

 

Being an OB nurse the research findings are appropriate to my practice setting and situation. Further research should be done including a larger sample size, teen parents and single parents. Rather providing a single message about Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, the education needs to be targeted to the individual. Further research on this topic will trigger changes in practice with a positive outcome.

 

Critique Template for a Qualitative Study

NURS 5052/NURS 6052

Week 6 Assignment: Application: Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies (due by Day 7 of Week 7)

Date: 10/15/2017

Your name: Sandhya Thomas

Article reference (in APA style): Crane, D., & Ball, H. L. (2016). A qualitative study in parental perceptions and understanding of SIDS-reduction guidance in a UK bi-cultural community. BMC Pediatrics, 161. doi: 10.1186/s12887-016-0560-7

URL:http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=66&sid=5449fa37-5ab8-4d72-b95a-d4cf314731b6%40sessionmgr4009

  

What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

 

When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these:

 

  • Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation?
  • What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness?
  • How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice?

 

To help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research study of your choice

 

If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor.

  

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE

 

  1. Research Issue and Purpose

 

What is the research question or issue of the referenced study? What is its purpose? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the question must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.)

 

The research question or issue of the referenced study was, why parents appear to follow some guidelines for SIDS-reduction and not others. The purpose of the study was to discover how white British and Pakistani mothers in Bradford recall, understand and interpret SIDS-guidance, and to explore whether and how they implement this guidance in caring for their infants. This will help explore the cultural context in which infant care is performed in order to inform future public health interventions and similar ethnically diverse populations.

 

  1. Researcher Pre-understandings

 

Does the article include a discussion of the researcher’s pre-understandings? What does the article disclose about the researcher’s professional and personal perspectives on the research problem? Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

 

The researchers pre-understanding was not included in the article.

 

  1. Literature Review

 

What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current, relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.)

 

The quality of the literature review is good. The literature is current and relevant. There is citations for all the evidence that the author critiqued. There is no integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, but the study contains anecdotal article citations, without the summary of the literature review as a whole. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

 

  1. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework

 

Is a theoretical or conceptual framework identified? If so, what is it? Is it a nursing framework or one drawn from another discipline? (Sometimes there is no explicitly identified theoretical or conceptual framework; in addition, many “nursing” research studies draw on a “borrowed” framework, e.g., stress, medical pathology, etc.)

 

A theoretical or conceptual framework for this study was that, differences existed in infant care practices between white British and UK Pakistani mothers. The background of the study also reveals that South Asian infant care protects infants from the most important SIDS-related factors such as cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption, sofa-sharing, prone sleep and solitary sleep.

 

  1. Participants

 

Who were the participants? Is the setting or study group adequately described? Is the setting appropriate for the research question? What type of sampling strategy was used? Was it appropriate? Was the sample size adequate? Did the researcher stipulate that information redundancy was achieved?

 

The participants of the study was mothers of 8-12 week old infants. The setting for the study was at Bradford Royal Infirmary Maternity Unit. The setting was appropriate for the research question. Purposive sampling strategy was used which was appropriate for the study. The interviews were done with 46 participants, 25 white British and 21 Pakistani mothers. The sample size for the study was small. The researcher did not stipulate that information redundancy was achieved. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

 

  1. Protection of Human Research Participants

 

What steps were taken to protect human research subjects?

 

Ethical approval was granted by Durham University and the NHS National Research Ethics Committee of Yorkshire and Humber. R&D Management approval was granted by Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and Bradford Institute for Health Research. Participant’s received oral and written information about the study at recruitment and again prior to the interview when written consent was obtained.

 

 

  1. Research Design

 

What was the design of the study? If the design was modeled from previous research or pilot studies, please describe.

 

The study design was a qualitative, cohort study. The study was based on findings from other studies that showed differences in infant care practices between white British and UK Pakistani mothers. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

 

  1. Data Collection/Generation Methods

 

What methods were used for data collection/generation? Was triangulation used? 

 

In depth narrative interviews was conducted to obtain qualitative data. All interviews were conducted and analyzed by one researcher with the guidance and supervision of the second researcher. The interviews were audio-taped and verbatim transcripts were thematically analyzed via a continuous comparative method as they were generated. Themes were discussed and agreed by both researchers. Triangulation was not used in this study.

 

  1. Credibility

 

Were the generated data credible? Explain your reasons.

 

The data that was generated by this study was credible. The participants of the study was mothers of infants 8-12 weeks old, who was aware of the SIDS-reduction guidance, implemented different infant sleeping practices for personal and cultural reasons. Mostly they were verbalizing their own experiences and reasons for doing so.

 

  1. Data Analysis

 

What methods were used for data analysis? What evidence was provided that the researcher’s analysis was accurate and replicable?

 

Narrative interviews was conducted and audio-taped. They were conducted in 4 equal batches from the two ethnic groups concurrently to ensure that developing themes were explored and cross-checked. The interviewer produced verbatim transcripts which were thematically analyzed through a continuous comparative methods as they were generated. Themes were discussed and agreed by both authors. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

 

  1. Findings

 

What were the findings?

 

All mothers were aware of UK SIDS-reduction guidance from leaflets presented to them during antenatal or postnatal interactions with healthcare providers. Pakistani mothers tended to dismiss the guidance as being irrelevant to their cultural practices; white British mothers dismissed, adapted and adopted aspects of the guidance to suit their preferred parenting decisions and personal circumstances. Many mothers misunderstood or misinterpreted the guidance given and explained their infant care behavior according to their social and cultural circumstances. The findings of the study suggests guidance and literature should be actually with acknowledgment, understanding and appreciation of variations in infant caregiving and discussion of the barriers to implementation encountered in different settings.

 

  1. Discussion of Findings

 

Was the discussion of findings related to the framework? Were those the expected findings?  Were they consistent with previous studies? Were serendipitous (i.e., accidental) findings described?

 

The discussion of the findings was related to the framework of the study. Research has not explored why parents appear to follow some SIDS-reduction guidelines and not others. The findings of the study was expected. There was no accidental findings described in the study.

 

  1. Limitations

 

Did the researcher report limitations of the study? (Limitations are acknowledgments of internal characteristics of the study that may help explain insignificant and other unexpected findings, and more importantly, indicate those groups to whom the findings CANNOT be generalized or applied. It is a fact that all studies must be limited in some way; not all of the issues involved in a problem situation can be studied all at once.)

 

The researchers have not reported any limitations in the study. After reviewing the study, the limitations could be the small sample size of the participants and the study was focused only to the mothers of bi-cultural community in Bradford.

 

  1. Implications

 

Are the conclusions and implications drawn by the author warranted by the study findings? (Sometimes researchers will seem to ignore findings that don’t confirm their expectations as they interpret the meaning of their study findings.) Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

 

The conclusions and implications drawn by the researchers warranted the study findings. The study suggests that more emphasis needs to be placed on the recommendations that are associated with the greater risk reduction in order to achieve the greatest benefit.

 

  1. Recommendations

 

Does the author offer legitimate recommendations for further research?  Is the description of the study sufficiently clear and complete to allow replication of the study? (Sometimes researchers’ recommendations seem to come from “left field” rather than following obviously from the discussion of findings. If a research problem is truly significant, the results need to be confirmed with additional research; in addition, if a reader wishes to design a study using a different sample or correcting flaws in the original study, a complete description is necessary.)

 

The researchers did not specifically recommend for further research. But recommendations were made for the need for risk minimization in infant sleep recommendations with an individually tailored approach by acknowledging the cultural preferences.

 

  1. Research Utilization in Your Practice

 

How might this research inform your practice? Are the research findings appropriate to your practice setting and situation? What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness? How might the utilization of this research trigger changes in other aspects of practice?

 

The findings are appropriate for my setting. We come across a lot bi-cultural mothers that provides infant care as per their cultural beliefs and practices. Further studies needs to be done how to incorporate the individually tailored approach to help new mothers or parents to be more compliant about following the SIDS-reduction guidance. The utilization of the research can health professional be trained more to be aware and understand of how infant care decisions are mediated and performed, in differing social and cultural environments, and to provide tailored information to allow parents to work within their personal constraints. Critiquing Quantitative and Qualitative Study.

 

Open chat
chat us now
Whatsapp Online Nursing Papers
We will write your work from scratch and ensure it's plagiarism-free, you just submit.