Barry Effect of An Intervention for Alcohol and Illicit Drug Use on Trauma Recidivism in A Cohort of Trauma Patients Critique The body of your paper should

Barry Effect of An Intervention for Alcohol and Illicit Drug Use on Trauma Recidivism in A Cohort of Trauma Patients Critique The body of your paper should be 4–6 double-spaced pages plus a cover page and a reference page. The critique must be attached to the article and follow APA guidelines. Summative Assignment: Critique of Research Article
A research critique demonstrates your ability to critically read an investigative
study. For this assignment, choose a research article related to nursing or medicine
to critique.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Articles used for one assignment can’t be used for the other assignments (students
should find new research articles for each assignment).
The selected articles should be original research articles. Review articles, metaanalysis, meta-synthesis, and systemic review should not be used.
Mixed-methods studies should not be used.
Your critique should include the following:
Research Problem/Purpose
State the problem clearly as it is presented in the report.
Have the investigators placed the study problem within the context of existing
knowledge?
Will the study solve a problem relevant to nursing?
State the purpose of the research.
Review of the Literature
Identify the concepts explored in the literature review.
Were the references current? If not, what do you think the reasons are?
Theoretical Framework
Are the theoretical concepts defined and related to the research?
Does the research draw solely on nursing theory or does it draw on theory from
other disciplines?
Is a theoretical framework stated in this research piece?
If not, suggest one that might be suitable for the study.
Variables/Hypotheses/Questions/Assumptions
What are the independent and dependent variables in this study?
Are the operational definitions of the variables given? If so, are they concrete and
measurable?
Is the research question or the hypothesis stated? What is it?
Methodology
What type of design (quantitative, qualitative, and type) was used in this study?
Was inductive or deductive reasoning used in this study?
State the sample size and study population, sampling method, and study setting.
Did the investigator choose a probability or non-probability sample?
State the type of reliability and the validity of the measurement tools.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Were ethical considerations addressed?
Data Analysis
What data analysis tool was used?
How were the results presented in the study?
Identify at least one (1) finding.
Summary/Conclusions, Implications, and Recommendations
What are the strengths and limitations of the study?
In terms of the findings, can the researcher generalize to other populations? Explain.
Evaluate the findings and conclusions as to their significance for nursing.
INSTRUCTION
The body of your paper should be 4–6 double-spaced pages plus a cover page and a
reference page. The critique must be attached to the article and follow APA
guidelines.
This rubric is used to evaluate the Research Critique Assignment in
NURS350.
Research
Problem/Purpose
Meets or Exceeds
Expectations
Mostly Meets
Expectations
Below Expectations
Does No
Expecta
Points
Range:25.2 (9.00%) 28 (10.00%)
Points
Range:21.28 (7.60%) 24.92 (8.90%)
Points
Range:16.8 (6.00%) 21 (7.50%)
Points
Range:0
16.52 (5
Research problem,
purpose of research,
and relevance to
nursing are clearly
identified.
Research problem,
purpose of research,
and relevance to
nursing are somewhat
identified.
Research problem,
purpose of research,
and relevance to
nursing are mostly
absent or
misidentified.
Resear
purpose
and rele
nursing
Review of the
Literature
Theoretical
Framework
Variables,
Hypotheses,
Questions, and
Assumptions
Meets or Exceeds
Expectations
Mostly Meets
Expectations
Below Expectations
Does No
Expecta
Points
Range:37.8 (13.50%) 42 (15.00%)
Points
Range:31.92 (11.40%) 37.38 (13.35%)
Points
Range:25.2 (9.00%) 31.5 (11.25%)
Points
Range:0
24.78 (8
Concepts explored in
the literature review
are clearly identified.
Critique of the
references is included
and well developed.
Concepts explored in
the literature review
are somewhat
identified. Critique of
the references is
included, but may not
be fully developed.
Concepts explored in
the literature review
are misidentified.
Critique of the
references is severely
lacking.
Concep
the liter
are abs
the refe
absent.
Points
Range:25.2 (9.00%) 28 (10.00%)
Points
Range:21.28 (7.60%) 24.92 (8.90%)
Points
Range:16.8 (6.00%) 21 (7.50%)
Points
Range:0
16.52 (5
A theoretical
concept/framework is
identified and well
analyzed for
appropriateness. If
the article lacks a
concept/framework, a
suitable one is
suggested.
A theoretical
concept/framework is
somewhat identified
and analyzed for
appropriateness. If the
article lacks a
concept/framework, a
potential
concept/framework is
suggested, but it is
somewhat
inappropriate.
A theoretical
concept/framework is
somewhat identified
and analyzed for
appropriateness. If
the article lacks a
concept/framework, a
potential
concept/framework is
suggested, is not
identified or is grossly
inappropriate.
A theor
concep
misiden
analyze
appropr
Points
Range:12.6 (4.50%) 14 (5.00%)
Points
Range:10.64 (3.80%) 12.46 (4.45%)
Points
Range:8.4 (3.00%) 10.5 (3.75%)
Points
Range:0
8.26 (2.
IV and DV are
identified and defined.
Discussion on
measurability is
included. Research
question and
hypothesis are
identified.
IV and DV are
somewhat identified
and or partially
defined. Discussion
on measurability is
somewhat included.
Research question
and hypothesis are
partially identified.
IV and DV
identification and
definition are absent
or severely lacking.
Discussion on
measurability is
absent or inaccurate.
Research question
and hypothesis are
not identified or
grossly misidentified.
IV and D
identific
definitio
Discuss
measur
absent.
questio
hypothe
identifie
Methodology
Data Analysis
Summary,
Conclusions,
Implications, and
Recommendations
Meets or Exceeds
Expectations
Mostly Meets
Expectations
Below Expectations
Does No
Expecta
Points
Range:50.4 (18.00%) 56 (20.00%)
Points
Range:42.56 (15.20%) 49.84 (17.80%)
Points
Range:33.6 (12.00%) 42 (15.00%)
Points
Range:0
33.04 (1
Type of design,
sample size, study
population, sampling
method, and type of
reasoning are
properly identified.
Reliability and validity
of measurement tools,
ethical considerations,
and probability vs.
non-probability
sampling are
discussed.
Type of design,
sample size, study
population, sampling
method, and type of
reasoning are
somewhat identified.
Reliability and validity
of measurement tools,
ethical considerations,
and probability vs.
non-probability
sampling are
discussed, but some
information is
inaccurate.
Type of design,
sample size, study
population, sampling
method, and type of
reasoning are absent
or misidentified.
Reliability and validity
of measurement tools,
ethical considerations,
and probability vs.
non-probability
sampling are either
absent or grossly
inaccurate.
Type of
sample
populat
method
reasoni
Reliabil
of meas
ethical c
and pro
non-pro
samplin
Points
Range:37.8 (13.50%) 42 (15.00%)
Points
Range:31.92 (11.40%) 37.38 (13.35%)
Points
Range:25.2 (9.00%) 31.5 (11.25%)
Points
Range:0
24.78 (8
Data analysis tool is
identified. An
explanation on how
the results are
presented in the study
is included and
accurate. At least one
finding is
appropriately
identified.
Data analysis tool is
somewhat identified.
An incomplete
explanation on how
the results are
presented in the study
is included. At least
one finding is
identified.
Data analysis tool is
absent or
misidentified. An
explanation on how
the results are
presented in the study
is absent or grossly
unclear. Findings are
not included or are
grossly inaccurate.
Data an
absent.
explana
the resu
present
is absen
are not
Points
Range:50.4 (18.00%) 56 (20.00%)
Points
Range:42.56 (15.20%) 49.84 (17.80%)
Points
Range:33.6 (12.00%) 42 (15.00%)
Points
Range:0
33.04 (1
Strengths and
limitations of the study
are identified. A
discussion on whether
or not the study can
Strengths and
limitations of the study
are somewhat
identified. A
discussion on whether
Strengths and
limitations of study
are absent or lacking.
A discussion on
whether or not the
Strengt
limitatio
are abs
discuss
or not th
Mechanics and APA
Format
Meets or Exceeds
Expectations
Mostly Meets
Expectations
be generalized is
included. An
evaluation of the
findings, conclusions,
and significance to
nursing is included
and appropriate.
or not the study can
be generalized is
included but may not
be fully developed. An
evaluation of the
findings, conclusions,
and significance to
nursing may not be
fully developed.
study can be
generalized is absent
or lacking. An
evaluation of the
findings, conclusions,
and significance to
nursing is absent or
inappropriate.
be gene
absent.
of the fi
conclus
significa
is absen
Points
Range:12.6 (4.50%) 14 (5.00%)
Points
Range:10.64 (3.80%) 12.46 (4.45%)
Points
Range:8.4 (3.00%) 10.5 (3.75%)
Points
Range:0
8.26 (2.
Written in a clear,
concise, formal, and
organized manner.
Responses are mostly
error free. Information
from sources is
appropriately
paraphrased and
accurately cited.
Writing is generally
clear and organized
but is not concise or
formal in language.
Multiple errors exist in
spelling and grammar
with minor
interference with
readability or
comprehension. Most
information from
sources is correctly
paraphrased and
cited.
Writing is generally
unclear and
unorganized. Some
errors in spelling and
grammar detract from
readability and
comprehension.
Sources are missing
or improperly cited.
Writing
unorgan
spelling
detract
readabi
compre
Sources
Name:NURS350-Research Critique
Below Expectations
Does No
Expecta

Purchase answer to see full
attachment