Critical Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies

Critical Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies

Order 100% Plagiarism & AI-Free Essay Now

The assignment will provide a critical analysis of quantitative and qualitative studies using Ellis’s (2023) appraisal tool.  Qualitative methodology is utilised in social sciences to inquire about people’s experiences from their perspective (Ellis, 2023).  On the other hand, Mohajan (2020) posits that quantitative methods are used in scientific inquiry to show cause-and-effect correlations. Ellis’s (2023) appraisal tool presents a structured to evaluate the validity and credibility of research findings. in addition, the framework is crucial in ensuring comprehensive research appraisal. The critical appraisal provides nurses with knowledge to identify, read, and adopt evidence-based clinical practice. An understanding of research methodologies, approaches, and analysis is vital in terms of establishing the significance of research in evidenced-based nursing practice. As outlined in the National and Midwifery Council (NMC], 2018) registered nurses (RNs) should be competent in research methods and ethics to help them to analyse, and apply research findings to inform nursing practice. The integration of up-to-date best evidence is related to improved patient care and positive outcomes (Gomez & Bernet, 2019).

Critique of Qualitative Research Paper

Research Approach

The article by Pratt and Bryne (2009) adopted a qualitative research approach, specifically applying a phenomenological methodology that is based on Colaizzi’s method. The qualitative method entails gathering and analysing non-numerical data to comprehend experiences, opinions, or concepts, thus revealing in-depth and rich insights not captured by quantitative research. The study adopted phenomenology, which seeks to describe the lived experience of people with Dupuytren’s disease, making qualitative methodology appropriate to determine how they perceive and cope with the condition.

Study methods

The researchers used semi-structured interviews to comprehend the lived experiences of 6 respondents with Dupuytren’s disease. Even though this approach is effective in collecting in-depth views, it is associated with low validity especially when the researchers stray from planned questions (DeJonckheere & Vaughn, 2019). Therefore, Pratt and Bryne (2009) used an aide memoir of open questions to guide data collection.

Title and Aim

The title vividly reflects the focus of the study and provides a basic overview of what the study is about and hence, it should be clear and easily understood. In addition, the title of Pratt and Bryne’s (2009) study is clear and in line with the aim of the study of understanding the lived experience of patients with Dupuytren’s disease of the hand. The aim of the study is justified and stated succinctly as there is minimal attention on the experiences of people with the disease in the existing nursing literature. Therefore, the study seeks to address this gap by fostering an understanding of patient experience with the disease can inform better patient support and clinical experience.

Critical Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies

Order 100% Plagiarism & AI-Free Essay Now

Author Credentials

The authors, Geraldine Byrne and Anna Pratt are highly qualified to undertake credible research. Byrne is a research lead while Pratt is a lecturer in occupational therapy, indicating their unparalleled capability and authority to undertake study on the lived experiences of patients with Dupuytren’s disease.

Recruitment

Purposive sampling was utilised to recruit the respondents. Purposive sampling aligns with phenomenological studies that seek to collect in-depth insights from persons with specific experiences, making it appropriate to understand the lived experience of patients with Dupuytren’s disease. Nonetheless, purposive sampling enables the selection of respondents based on specific attributes and can limit diversity and variability in a larger population (Andrade, 2021). Regardless of the involvement of both postoperative and preoperative patients was instrumental in capturing a wide array of experiences, thus enriching the data obtained. However, the main limitation is that the sample was small as it comprised one woman and six men, possibly limiting the generalisability of the findings

Methods of collecting data

Semi-structured interviews were applied to collect data, which allowed respondents to air their experiences regarding the disease in their own words. This method is aligned with the phenomenological method as it promotes in-depth exploration of the personal experience (Aguas, 2020). However, Bergen, and Labonté (2020) found that self-reported data is subject to bias given that the respondents may not accurately remember past events and experiences or may strive to present their experience positively.

Data Collection Methods

Colaizzi’s phenomenological method was used to analyse data and involved obtaining relevant information from the respondents, determining the meaning of the statements, and organising them into clear themes. This method of data analysis is thorough and ensures that the analysis mainly focuses on the experiences of the participants (Neuendorf, 2018).  Nonetheless, Nowell et al. (2017) affirm that thematic analysis is mainly interpretative as theme development and analysis depend on the researcher’s views leading to subjectivity. despite the interpretive subjective, Pratt and Bryne (2009) used verbatim quotes that involve examples from respondent narratives to improve the credibility of the findings.

Analysis and Results/Findings

In regards to the findings, four interconnected themes were identified including being aware that the disease exists; living with the disease and how patients coped with it to maintain independence; the decision regarding treatment of the disease; and issues that affect it especially lack of support from health professionals, information and, receiving treatment (Pratt and Bryne, 2009). These highlight the experience of the participants in regard to surgery and post-surgery rehabilitation. Although the findings reflect the lived experience of the patients with Dupuytren’s disease, it does not adequately consider variations in experiences based on socio-economic status, gender, and age of the patients, which could have otherwise offered a more in-depth recognitions of the lived experience of the patients.

Critical Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies

Order 100% Plagiarism & AI-Free Essay Now

Ethical Consideration

For a credible and trustworthy research study, it must adhere to the relevant ethical considerations (Ellis, 2023). Researchers were ethical and approvals were obtained from the relevant authority, which in this case was the Local Research Ethics Committee and Research Monitoring and Governance Committee, granting the study the requisite ethical rigour.

To maintain confidentiality, the names of the participants were anonymised further highlighting the inclination of the study to maintain the ethical principle of discretion. Informed consent was obtained while the respondents were aware of the right to withdraw from research. However, the study did not state whether it provided any support to respondents after the interviews, which is essential in studies that deal with personal experiences that are characterised by distress (Busetto et al., 2020).

Quality of the study

According to Daniel (2019), the quality of qualitative studies is determined by rigour, dependability, credibility, and transferability.

Regarding the rigour, the methodology is exemplary and clearly describes the process of collecting data and data analysis, but the main limitation is that the sample size is small while failure to include demographic diversity hampers the transferability of the findings.

Considering credibility, the adoption of verbatim quotes and a clear and in-depth description of the data analysis process enhance the credibility of the findings.

Dependability was attained by the researchers offering detailed explanations of the methodology, making it easier to be emulated by other researchers while the reliability of the study has been attained by using a second researcher to verify coding.

Confirmability was realised by researchers acknowledging the existence of biases and the measures adopted to reduce them. Although much could have been done to enhance objectivity such as assisting the respondents to validate the findings.

The study has an element of transferability where the authors provide an in-depth description of the experiences of the participants that can be considered in other contexts. However, using local and small samples was a major limitation.

Conclusion

The study offers valuable insight into what patients with Dupuytren’s disease experience, which is a significant clinical improvement area that should be considered, particularly regarding patient support and education. The study offers valuable evidence to nursing practice as it emphasises on comprehending patient experience in managing chronic conditions and other diseases with limited nursing research. To build on the findings of the study, it is prudent for further research that explore experiences using a larger sample and across diverse respondents to foster understanding and applicability.

Critique of Quantitative Research Paper

Research Approach

Sàenz-Jalón et al. (2020) study adopted a quantitative approach, which entails gathering and analysing numerical data to test hypotheses and detect patterns emerging from research. Quantitative methodology is different from qualitative methodology which seeks to understand situations based on concepts, experiences, and opinions. This study is a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the efficacy of the intervention by rigorously allocating respondents to distinct groups and making a comparison of the results. The choice of randomized control trial is appropriate in that the study seeks to compare how two antiseptic solutions are effective in preventing infections at pin-site. In addition, RCT promotes control over confounding variables while offering quality evidence regarding the impacts of intervention.

Critical Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies

Order 100% Plagiarism & AI-Free Essay Now

Study Methods

The authors employed clear and relevant methods addressing the research questions. The respondents were orthopaedic patients who required external fixators and were randomly assigned to be administered either povidone-iodine or chlorhexidine-alcohol during pin-site care. Generally, the method was relevant for exploring and comparing the solutions’ efficacy.

Title and Aims

The topic highlights the focus of the study, which is comparing how the antiseptic solutions for care on pin site. The aim of the study is due to inadequate information and consensus regarding the most effective antiseptic that can prevent infections during pin site care. The rationale is supported well by literature pinpointing the complications and incidence of infections at pin-site.

Author Credentials

The authors of the study are affiliated with reputable institutions of higher learning such as the University of Cantabria and Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital while their professional background and academic qualifications indicate their suitability in undertaking this research.

Recruitment

The respondents were recruited from third-level trauma Centre. The respondents required an external fixator and were to be over 18 years old. The exclusion criteria included pre-existing infections and a history of developing adverse effects upon the use of antiseptics. The adoption of consecutive sampling was appropriate, ensuring that the sample represented the target population.

Data Collections Methods

Sàenz-Jalón et al. (2020) adopted a clinical assessment to collect data. The clinical assessment involved cultures of the pin site after removing the fixators. The researchers utilised an open design, indicating that neither the researchers nor the respondents were blinded to the intervention. Whereas this approach may lead to bias (Pitre et al., 2023), the visible distinction between the two antiseptic solutions made the approach appropriate. The strength of this method of data collection is that it objectively measures the pin site infections through culture. However, a notable limitation arises from the lack of blinding. Pitre et al. (2023) also add that blinding is useful in evaluating the risk bias in RCTs

Analysis and Results/findings

Data analysis entailed the use of descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, Pearson’s correlation, and student’s t-test, making data analysis more comprehensive. The results showed that there were no significant differences in the action of the two antiseptic solutions in the infection sites. However, it was noted that long fixator time increased the susceptibility to infection. The results reflect previous studies, affirming its validity. Nevertheless, Krauss (2019) argues that including a detailed evaluation of limitations and confounding factors could have increased the weight of the discussion.

Ethical Consideration

Ellis (2023) demonstrates that ethics is the basis of the research process. As a result, Sàenz-Jalón et al. (2020) sought approval from the hospital’s institutional review board. The study adhered to ethical concerns including obtaining informed consent from the respondents, guaranteeing confidentiality, and ensuring that the respondents understood their right to withdraw. Adhering to the ethical principles enhanced the credibility of the study.

Critical Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies

Order 100% Plagiarism & AI-Free Essay Now

Quality of the study

Considering the Ellis (2023) critical appraisal tools several strengths can be identified in the study. The adoption of the randomisation process reduced the selection bias. However, the lack of blinding increased the risk of performance bias (Pitre et al., 2023). Likewise, the authors ensure the validity of the findings by the extraction of culture at pin sites to diagnose infections. Moreover, to ensure the reliability of data, pin site care protocols were consistently adhered to. Generally, the sample was representative of the target population but generalisability was limited by the use of a single Centre-design. Confounding issues including the use of medications and comorbidities increased the potential of having impacts on the results.

Conclusion

Sàenz-Jalón et al’s. (2020) study offer appropriate evidence on the relative effectiveness of povidone-iodine and Chlorhexidine-alcohol solutions in minimising or preventing the occurrence of infections at pin sites. The results highlight that both antiseptic solutions are effective and hence, indicate the practical implications in clinical practice. However, the failure to include potential confounders and the use of open design could affect the interpretation of findings. Generally, the research is essential in supporting the body of evidence on care of pin-site areas and hence, it is useful in supporting decision-making in nursing practice.

References

Pratt L. A., & Bryne, G. (2009). Understanding Patient Perspectives: The lived experience of       Dupuytren’s disease of the hand. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 1793-1802.           https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2008.02692.x

Sàenz-Jalón, M., Sarabia-Cobo, M. C., Bartholome, R. E., Fernàdez S. M., Vélez. B., Escudero. M., Miguel. E. M., Artabe. P., Cabañas. I., Fernàdez. A., Garcés. C., and Couceiro. J. (2020).  A randomized clinical Trial on the Use of Antiseptic Solutions for the Pin-Site          Care of External Fixators: Chlorhexidine-Alcohol Versus Povidone-Iodine. Society of  Trauma Nurses, 27(3), 146-150.

Busetto, L., Wick, W., & Gumbinger, C. (2020). How to use and assess qualitative research methods. Neurological Research and Practice, 2(1), 14.           https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnma.2019.01.006.

DeJonckheere, M., & Vaughn, L. M. (2019). Semi-structured interviewing in primary care research: A balance of relationship and rigour. Family medicine and community health, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.1136%2Ffmch-2018-000057.

National and Midwifery Council. (2018). Standards of competence for registered nurses.             https://www.nmc.org.uk/globalassets/sitedocuments/standards/nmc-standards-for- competence-for-registered-nurses.pdf.

Gomez, L. E., & Bernet, P. (2019). Diversity improves performance and outcomes. Journal of the National Medical Association, 111(4), 383-392.           https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnma.2019.01.006.

Mohajan, H. K. (2020). Quantitative research: A successful investigation in natural and social sciences. Journal of Economic Development, Environment, and People, 9(4), 50-79.

Andrade, C. (2021). The inconvenient truth about convenience and purposive samples. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 43(1), 86-88.  https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0253717620977000.

Ellis, P. (2023). Evidence-based practice in nursing. (5^th ed.) London Sage Learning Matters.

Bergen, N., & Labonté, R. (2020). “Everything is perfect, and we have no problems”: detecting   and limiting social desirability bias in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research,  30(5), 783-792. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732319889354.

Aguas, P. P. (2020). Key stakeholders’ lived experiences while implementing an aligned    curriculum: A phenomenological study. The Qualitative Report, 25(10), 3459-3485.

Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International journal of qualitative methods, 16(1),  1609406917733847. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847.

Neuendorf, K. A. (2018). Content analysis and thematic analysis. In Advanced research methods  for applied psychology (pp. 211-223). Routledge.

Daniel, B. K. (2019). Using the TACT framework to learn the principles of rigour in qualitative    research. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 17(3), pp118-129.           https://doi.org/10.34190/JBRM.17.3.002.

Pitre, T., Kirsh, S., Jassal, T., Anderson, M., Padoan, A., Xiang, A., … & Zeraatkar, D. (2023).     The impact of blinding on trial results: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Cochrane Evidence Synthesis and Methods, 1(4), e12015. https://doi.org/10.1002/cesm.12015.

Krauss, A. (2018). Why all randomised controlled trials produce biased results. Annals of Medicine, 50(4), 312-322. https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2018.1453233

Critical Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies

Order 100% Plagiarism & AI-Free Essay Now

By admin in Essays on January 16, 2025