Imagine that someone has circulated a memorandum arguing that your company retain your current legal counsel.
You, however, are convinced that it is time for a change, and want to demonstrate that....
This would then help the reader to identify if this is the type of research study that would be applicable to their own practice or learning. Authors The authors’ qualifications are provided, and they all are registered nurses, all of which have postgraduate degrees, and two of which have doctorates.
They all work within nursing education within a University context.
The author will review Tangkawanich et al (2008 p 216) ‘Causal model of health: health-related quality of life in people living with HIV/AIDS in the northern region of Thailand.’ This article is published in a reputable journal, The Journal of Nursing and Health Sciences which addresses issues of interest and concern to nurses internationally, and as such, offers specific insight into HIV/AIDS and nursing within a global context.
There are a number of appraisal tools available to healthcare practitioners to assist them in analysing and critiquing primary research articles.
While the nature of the research in setting out to ‘examine the causal relationships between age, antriretroviral treatment, social support, symptom experience, self-care strategies and health related quality of life’ (Tangkawanich et al, 2008 p 216) in the chosen sample and population, is apparent in the abstract, there is little indication of these particular variables in the title, although the description of the ‘causal model’ (Tangkawanich et al, 2008 p 216) does indicate the nature of the research.
The use of the word ‘causal’ (Tangkawanich et al, 2008 p 216) also suggests that this is a quantitative research article.
"It requires some knowledge of the subject matter and knowledge of how to critically read and use critiquing criteria." ("Nursing Research: Methods and Critical Appraisal for Evidence-Based Practice." Elsevier Health Sciences, 2006) "A critique should emphasize first what the article contributes to the field and then identify the shortcomings or limitations," write authors H. It isn't enough just to say that the paper in question is flawed but also how it's flawed and why—what's the proof that the argument won't hold up?
A critique is not the same as a demonstration that the conclusion of someone's argument is false.