Discussion: Appraisal of Research Critic
Discussion: Appraisal of Research Critic
Question Description
To Prepare:
Permalink:
Review the Resources and consider the importance of critically appraising research evidence.
Reflect on the four peer-reviewed articles you selected in Module 2 and analyzed in Module 3. THESE ARTICLES HAVE BEEN INPUT INTO THE TEMPLATE FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE
Review and download the Critical Appraisal Tools document provided in the Resources. THAT TOOL IS BELOW
The Assignment (Evidence-Based Project)
Part 4A: Critical Appraisal of Research
Conduct a critical appraisal of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected and analyzed by completing the Critical Appraisal Tools document. Be sure to include:
An evaluation table
A levels of evidence table
An outcomes synthesis table
Part 4B: Critical Appraisal of Research
Based on your appraisal, in a 1-2-page critical appraisal, suggest a best practice that emerges from the research you reviewed. Briefly explain the best practice, justifying your proposal with APA citations of the research.
Critical Appraisal Tools Worksheet Template
Evaluation Table
Use this document to complete the evaluation table requirement of the Module 4 Assessment, Evidence-Based Project, Part 4A: Critical Appraisal of Research
Full citation of selected article
Article #1
Article #2
Article #3
Article #4
Cotogni, P., Barbero, C., & Rinaldi, M. (2015).
Deep sternal wound infection after cardiac
surgery: Evidences and controversies.
World journal of critical care medicine, 4(4),
265–273. doi:10.5492/wjccm. v4.i4.265.
Retrieved from
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles
/PMC4631871/
Kubota, H., Miyata, H., Motomura, N., Ono, M.,
Takamoto, S., Harii, K., … Kyo, S. (2013).
Deep sternal wound infection after
cardiac surgery. Journal of cardiothoracic
surgery, 8, 132. doi:10.1186/1749-8090-8-132.
Retrieved from
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
pmc/articles/PMC3663691/
Simek, M., Chudoba, A., Hajek, R.,
Tobbia, P., Molitor, M., &
Nemec, P. (2018). From open
packing to negative wound
pressure therapy: A critical overview
of deep sternal wound infection
treatment strategies after cardiac surgery. Biomedical Papers Of
The Medical Faculty Of The University
Palacky, Olomouc, Czechoslovakia. doi:10.5507/bp.2018.053.https://org.exp.waldenulibrary.org/doi:10.5507/bp.2018.053
Simor, A. E. (2011). Staphylococcal
decolonisation: An effective strategy
for prevention of infection?
The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 11(12),
952-62.
Retrieved from
https://ezp.waldenulibrary.org/login?url=
https://search-proquest-com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/
docview/906522531?accountid=14872
Conceptual Framework
Describe the theoretical basis for the study
Design/Method Describe the design
and how the study
was carried out
Sample/Setting
The number and
characteristics of
patients,
attrition rate, etc.
Major Variables Studied
List and define dependent and independent variables
Measurement
Identify primary statistics used to answer clinical questions
Data Analysis
Statistical or
qualitative
findings
Findings and Recommendations
General findings and recommendations of the research
Appraisal
Describe the general worth of this research to practice. What are the strengths and limitations of study? What are the risks associated with implementation of the suggested practices or processes detailed in the research? What is the feasibility of
use in your practice?
General Notes/Comments
Levels of Evidence Table Discussion: Appraisal of Research Critic
Use this document to complete the levels of evidence table requirement of the Module 4 Assessment, Evidence-Based Project, Part 4A: Critical Appraisal of Research
Author and year of selected article
Article #1
Article #2
Article #3
Article #4
Study Design
Theoretical basis for the study
Sample/Setting
The number and
characteristics of
patients
Evidence Level *
(I, II, or III)
Outcomes
General Notes/Comments
* Evidence Levels:
Level I
Experimental, randomized controlled trial (RCT), systematic review RTCs with or without meta-analysis
Level II
Quasi-experimental studies, systematic review of a combination of RCTs and quasi-experimental studies, or quasi-experimental studies only, with or without meta-analysis
Level III
Nonexperimental, systematic review of RCTs, quasi-experimental with/without meta-analysis, qualitative, qualitative systematic review with/without meta-synthesis
Level IV
Respected authorities’ opinions, nationally recognized expert committee/consensus panel reports based on scientific evidence
Level V
Literature reviews, quality improvement, program evaluation, financial evaluation, case reports, nationally recognized expert(s) opinion based on experiential evidence
Outcomes Synthesis Table
Use this document to complete the outcomes synthesis table requirement of the Module 4 Assessment, Evidence-Based Project, Part 4A: Critical Appraisal of Research
Author and year of selected article
Article #1
Article #2
Article #3
Article #4
Sample/Setting
The number and
characteristics of
patients
Outcomes
Key Findings
Appraisal and Study Quality
General Notes/Comments
Part 4B: Critical Appraisal of Research
Based on your appraisal, in a 1-2-page critical appraisal, suggest a best practice that emerges from the research you reviewed. Briefly explain the best practice, justifying your proposal with at least 3 to 5 APA citations of the research.
You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes.
Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages.
Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor.
The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.
ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS
Discussion Questions (DQ)
- Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
- Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
- One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
- I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.
Weekly Participation
- Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
- In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
- Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
- Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.
APA Format and Writing Quality
- Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
- Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
- I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.
Use of Direct Quotes
- I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
- As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
- It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.
LopesWrite Policy
- For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
- Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
- Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
- Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.
Late Policy
- The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
- Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
- If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
- I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
- As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.
Communication
- Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me:
- Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
- Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.
Discussion: Appraisal of Research Critic
Discussion: Appraisal of Research Critic
