Critically evaluating published research studies as a foundation for making evidence-based practice decisions.

Research Critique (Draft=5 points/5% of grade; Final=25 points/25% of grade)
Purpose: This assignment allows students to demonstrate their ability to integrate and apply knowledge in relation
to critically evaluating published research studies as a foundation for making evidence-based practice decisions.
Directions
1. Choose from among the articles preselected by instructor and/or your own selections, to critique
2. The paper should be 10 to 12 double-spaced pages—including 1 cover page and at least 1 reference page
3. No more than 2 quotes can be used in paper
4. Use APA format for development of paper—review Week 1 notes.
5. You will have a total of 4 sources. (4 sources does not mean 4 research studies, see below)
a. The primary article that you selected from those provided by the faculty or your own selection.
b. Three additional sources.
i. For example, an article discussing either theoretical framework or methodology that
aligns with the framework or methodology of your primary article.
ii. Another example would be part of an article for another research study on a similar topic
or using similar methods.
iii. Another example would be use of the textbook to support your discussion of any
section of the critique.
iv. There may be other scholarly works that could be used. Those listed above are
examples. Check with your course faculty if you are not sure if a work is scholarly.
6. The paper will be submitted to turn-it in and revised as necessary to obtain originality score of less than
25%. Please also use the grammar and spelling component of TII.
7. Both the draft and final critique should follow the followingformat:
a. Introduction (review the criteria for introduction inAPA)
i. Discusses purpose of you writing the paper
ii. Discusses relevance of assignment to evidence-based practice (EBP) in nursing
iii. Provides a citation for the study(ies) being discussed
b. Author Credibility
i. Strengths of author(s) ability/credibility for the primary study to carry out the research
ii. Limitations of author(s) ability/credibility in the primary study to carry out the research.
c. Literature Review of the Primary Study
i. Discuss 3 or more major themes presented in the literature review
ii. Describe strengths and limitations of the literature review
iii. Describe how this literature review aligns with the gap in the previous literature in the topic
area identified by the author(s)
iv. State the purpose of the study and discuss how the literature review aligns with the stated or
implied purpose of the study
v. Evaluate the consistency between the literature review, problem, and purpose for the
study
d. Target Population, Sample, and Sampling Method
i. Concisely and clearly describe the target population for the primary study
ii. Concisely and clearly describe the sample for your primary study
1. Age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, income, geographic location
2. Number of participants in the study
3. Other relevant characteristics
iii. Concisely and clearly describe the sampling method/procedures for your study
iv. Discuss the strengths and limitations of the sample and sampling procedure for your
study, including the representativeness of the sample in relation to the target
population
20
e. Research Design and Variables
i. Articulate the research design for your study
ii. Evaluate the strengths and limitations of the study design in relation to the studypurpose
iii. Explain the major study variables for your study
f. Data Collection Procedure
i. Provide a detailed discussion of the data collection process for your study
ii. Discuss the strengths and limitations of the data collection process for your study
iii. Compare the data collection procedure for your study to that of your comparison study
and/or with your theoretical or methodological article(s)
g. Outcome Measures
i. Describe the tools/instruments used to collect data to measure variables (outcome measures)
1. Format (paper pencil, online, telephone, interview)
2. Name of survey or questionnaire
3. Number of items in survey or questionnaire
4. Type of survey or questionnaire (short answer, true false, Likert Scale)
5. Describe other data collection tools (if applicable)
6. Discuss how reliability and validity of data collection methods were evaluated
ii. Discuss strengths and limitations of data collection process in relation to study purpose
h. Protection of Participant’s Rights
i. Describe process used to protect participants
ii. Evaluate strengths and limitations of process used to protect participants based on 3
principles guiding the ethical conduct of research
i. Data Analysis Procedure(s)
i. Provide a detailed discussion of the data analysis process
1. Data preparation
2. Statistical and/or non-statistical processes used
3. Levels of significance set
ii. Evaluate the appropriateness of the data analysis procedures for your study in
relation to the purpose of the study and the level of data
iii. Describe processes used to ensure accuracy of analysis and interpretation
iv. Discuss the strengths and limitations of the data analysis process for your study
j. Major Findings
i. Discuss major findings relative to key variables (both statistically significant andclinically
relevant findings)
ii. Evaluate the believability of the study findings and provide a rationale for yourevaluation
k. Conclusion
i. Summarize the major points from your research study
ii. Describe the major study implications
iii. Discuss the major study limitations and the impact of limitations on the usefulness to guide
evidence-based practice
iv. Describe one thing that you learned about the topic of interest and how you can apply this
knowledge to your future practice as a nursing student/nurse
21
v. Discuss one thing that you learned about the relationship between research andEBP
through completing the research critique
Due date for the research critique draft: Refer to the Course Schedule and due date posted onCanvas
Due date for the research critique final: Refer to the Course Schedule and due date posted onCanvas
Note: Because the purpose of the draft is to allow students to improve the final critique grade, faculty will not prereview either of these assignments. It is expected that students will make revisions for the final critique based on
faculty review of the draft. Faculty will be available during Zoom office hours or by appointment to answer
specific assignment-related questions, approve articles.
Example of Grading Points for Draft and Final Critique.
Percentage
Grade
Numerical Grade/Points for Critique Draft Numerical Grade/Points for Final Critique
100% 5 25
99% 4.95 24.75
98% 4.9 24.5
97% 4.85 24.25
96% 4.8 24
95% 4.75 23.75
94% 4.7 23.5
93% 4.65 23.25
92% 4.6 23
91% 4.55 33.75
90% 4.5 22.5
89% 4.45 22.25
88% 4.4 22
87% 4.35 21.75
86% 4.3 21.5
85% 4.25 21.25
84% 4.2 21
83% 4.15 20.75
82% 4.1 20.5
81% 4.05 20.25
80% 4 20
79% 3.95 19.75
78% 3.9 19.5
77% 3.85 19.25
76% 3.8 19
75% 3.75 18.75
74% 3.7 18.5
73% 3.65 18.25
72% 3.6 18
71% 3.55 17.75
70% 3.5 17.5
Research Critique Scoring Rubric for the Draft Version of the Research Critique
Student Critique Draft Points Earned /5 points
Components Excellent Good Fair Poor Omitted Points
0.25 points 0.225 points 0.2 points 0.175 points 0 points
Introduction
0.25 points
Discusses purpose of
paper, discusses
relevance to evidencebased practice, and
provides citation of
study being critiqued.
Provides basic
information regarding
purpose of paper and
relevance to evidencebased practice
Overall provides basic
information regarding
purpose of paper and
relevance to evidencebased practice but one
area is noticeably more
weakly developed or
absent
Both of the following
are absent or poorly
developed: essay
purpose and relevance
to evidence-based
practice
0.25 points 0.225 points 0.2 points 0.175 points 0 points
Author Credibility to
Conduct Research
0.25 points
Strengths and
limitations of authors
and credibility concisely
yet thoroughly discussed
Strengths, limitations,
and credibility of
authors discussed
Strengths, limitations
and/or credibility of
authors discussed but
not all three
Missing two of the
following: Strengths,
limitations, or credibility
of authors
0.25 points 0.225 points 0.2 points 0.175 points 0 points
Literature Review
and Problem
Statement, Purpose
Statement
0.25 points
Discusses 3 or more
major themes presented
in literature review,
describes strengths and
limitations of review,
describes gap in
literature, purpose
statement, and
consistency between all
areas
Discusses at least one
theme presented in
literature review,
describes strengths and
limitations of review,
describes gap in
literature, and purpose
statement. Discusses
consistency between
areas
No themes discussed.
Describes strengths and
limitations of review,
describes gap in
literature, and purpose
statement. Discusses
consistency between all
areas, but one area is
noticeably more weakly
developed or absent
Basic info missing about
two or more areas:
themes in literature
review, gap in literature,
purpose statement, or
evaluation of
consistency among areas
23
Components Excellent Good Fair Poor Omitted Points
0.25 points 0.225 points 0.2 points 0.175 points 0 points
Target Population,
Sample, and
Sampling Method
0.25 points
Concisely and clearly
describes, sample and
sampling procedure,
target population,
sample, and sampling
method. Discusses
strengths and
limitations of sample
and sampling
procedure
Provides basic
information about
target population,
sample, and sampling
method. Minimal
discussion of sample
and sampling
procedure strengths
or limitations
Overall provides basic
information regarding
target population,
sample, and sampling
method, but one area
is noticeably more
weakly developed or
absent. No
discussion of
strengths or
limitations of sample
and sampling
procedure
Basic information
regarding two or
more of the following
are absent: target
population, sample,
and sampling method
0.25 points 0.225 points 0.2 points 0.175 points 0 points
Research Design ,
Independent and
Dependent
Variables
0.25 points
Accurately articulates
research design and
key study variables.
Discusses strengths
and limitations of
research design)
Discusses research
design and key study
variables. Limited
discussion of
strengths or
limitations of research
design
Inaccurately
articulates research
design or key study
variables. Discusses
strengths and
limitations of research
design)
Basic information
about two or more of
the following
inaccurate or missing:
research design,
variables, strengths or
limitations of research
design
0.5 points 0.45 points 0.4 points 0.35 points 0 points
Data Collection
Procedure
0.5 points
Concisely provides
detailed information
regarding data
collection process.
Discusses strengths
and limitations
relative to study
purpose
Provides basic
information regarding
data collection
process. Discusses
strengths and
limitations
Provides basic
information about
data collection
process but one or
more key components
of process is missing.
Missing discussion of
strengths or
limitations
Missing two or more
components of data
collection process.
Missing discussion of
strengths and
limitations.
24
Components Excellent Good Fair Poor Omitted Points
0.5 points 0.45 points 0.4 points 0.35 points 0 points
Outcome
Measures
0.5 points
Insightfully and
concisely provides
information regarding
instruments used to
collect outcome
measures and process
used to evaluate
reliability and validity
of instruments
Provides basic
information about
instruments used to
collect outcome
measures. Discusses
reliability or validity
evaluation
Provides basic
information about
instruments used to
collect outcome
measures. No
discussion of
reliability or validity
evaluation
Limited information
about instruments
used to collect
outcome measures.
No discussion of
reliability or validity
evaluation
0.25 points 0.225 points 0.2 points 0.175 points 0 points
Protection of
Participants’
Rights
0.25 points
Uses 3 ethical
principles to provide
information regarding
specific measures
taken to protect
participants’ rights
and minimize risks of
harm and identified
measures that could
have been taken but
were not)
Does not discuss 3
principles, but
provides basic
information regarding
measures taken to
protect participants’
rights and minimize
risks of harm
Minimum
information regarding
measures taken to
protect participants’
rights and minimize
risks of harm
No information
regarding measures
taken to protect
participants’ rights
and minimize risks of
harm
0.5 points 0.45 points 0.4 points 0.35 points 0 points
Data Analysis
Procedure
0.5 points
Insightfully and
concisely provides
step by step
information regarding
data analysis process
including preparation
of data, statistical
and/or non
-statistical
processes used, level
of significance set and
procedures for
ensuring accuracy of
analysis and
interpretation.
Discusses strengths
and limitations of
analysis process
Provides basic
information regarding
data analysis process,
level of significance
set and procedures for
ensuring accuracy of
analysis and
interpretation.
Discusses strengths
and limitations of
analysis process
Provides basic
information regarding
data analysis process,
level of significance
set and procedures for
ensuring accuracy of
analysis and
interpretation.
Discusses strengths
and limitations of
analysis process but
one area noticeably
less well developed
Provides basic
information regarding
data analysis process,
level of significance
set and procedures for
ensuring accuracy of
analysis and
interpretation.
Discusses strengths
and limitations of
analysis process, but
two or more areas
weakly developed
25
Components Excellent Good Fair Poor Omitted Points
0.5 points 0.45 points 0.4 points 0.35 points 0 points
Major Findings
0.5 points
Insightfully and
concisely discusses
major findings relative
to key variables,
believability of
findings, implications
as described by study
authors, study
limitations, and
provides rationale for
conclusions
Provides basic
information about
major findings,
implications as
described by study
authors, study
limitations, and
provides rationale for
conclusions
Provides basic
information about
major findings,
implications as
described by study
authors, study
limitations, and
provides rationale for
conclusions but one
area is absent or
noticeably less
developed
Two or more of the
following is missing:
basic information
about major findings,
implications as
described by study
authors, study
limitations, or
rationale for
conclusions
0.25 points 0.225 points 0.2 points 0.175 points 0 points
Conclusion
0.25 points
Conclusion
summarizes major
points and articulates
relevance of findings
from research
critiques to evidencebased practice
Provides basic
information about
one or two major
points. Relevance of
critiques to EBP
included.
Minimum information
about major points.
Relevance to EBP
poorly articulated.
No information about
major points and/or
no mention of
relevance to EBP
0.25 points 0.225 points 0.2 points 0.175 points 0 points
Organization
0.25 points
Organization is logical
and coherent, making
insightful connections
among ideas
Organization is logical
and coherent, clearly
making connections
among ideas
Organization is
limited,
demonstrating serious
problems with
coherence or
progression of ideas
Organization is so
limited that the piece
is difficult, if not
impossible, to
understand
0.25 points 0.225 points 0.2 points 0.175 points 0 points
Mechanics
0.25 points
Is free of most errors
in grammar and
mechanics. No more
than 2 quotes
Shows control of
grammar and
mechanics but may
display some errors. .
No more than 2
quotes
Repeated errors in
grammar and
mechanics interfere
with the writer’s
purpose. Three to five
quotes
Errors in grammar &
mechanics make it
difficult, if not
impossible, to
understand. Six or
more quotes
26
Components Excellent Good Fair Poor Omitted Points
0.25 points 0.225 points 0.2 points 0.175 points 0 points
Originality Score
0.25points
Originality score less
than 25%
Originality score 25-
27%
Originality score 27.1
to 29.9%
Originality score 30%
or more
0.25 points 0.225 points 0.2 points 0.175 points 0 points
Evidence
0.25points
Evidence is
substantial, specific
and/or illustrative
with sophisticated
ideas that are
particularly well
developed and
supported. Uses at
least 3 relevant
sources beyond study
critiqued (total of 4
sources)
Evidence is sufficient
and consistent with
ideas that are well
developed and
supported. Uses at
least 2 relevant peerreviewed articles
beyond study
critiqued.
(total of 3 sources)
Evidence is adequate
to explain some key
concepts but may lack
sufficient supporting
details. Uses at least 1
relevant peerreviewed article
beyond study
critiqued. (total of 2
sources)
Contains little or no
evidence to support
ideas. Does not use
any articles beyond
study critiqued.
(fewer than 2
sources)
0.25 points 0.225 points 0.2 points 0.175 points 0 points
Use of Sources/
Documentation
0.25points
Uses varied and
sufficient sources
effectively and
documents accurately
using APA format
Uses sufficient
sources and
documents accurately
using APA format
Lacks depth in
research for the issue;
inconsistently
incorporates and/or
documents sources
using APA format
Fails to document
sources or uses
inappropriate sources
27
Research Critique Scoring Rubric for the Final Version of the Research Critique
Student Final Critique Points Earned /25 points
Components Excellent Good Fair Poor Omitted Points
1.25 points 1.125 points 1 point 0.875 points 0 points
Introduction
1.25 points
Discusses purpose of
paper, discusses
relevance to evidencebased practice, and
provides citation of
study being critiqued.
Provides basic
information regarding
purpose of paper and
relevance to evidencebased practice
Overall provides basic
information regarding
purpose of paper and
relevance to evidencebased practice but one
area is noticeably more
weakly developed or
absent
Both of the following
are absent or poorly
developed: essay
purpose and relevance
to evidence-based
practice
1.25 points 1.125 points 1 point 0.875 points 0 points
Author Credibility to
Conduct Research
1.25 points
Strengths and
limitations of authors
and credibility concisely
yet thoroughly discussed
Strengths, limitations,
and credibility of
authors discussed
Strengths, limitations
and/or credibility of
authors discussed but
not all three
Missing two of the
following: Strengths,
limitations, or credibility
of authors
1.25 points 1.125 points 1 point 0.875 points 0 points
Literature Review
and Problem
Statement, Purpose
Statement
1.25 points
Discusses 3 or more
major themes presented
in literature review,
describes strengths and
limitations of review,
describes gap in
literature, purpose
statement, and
consistency between all
areas
Discusses at least one
theme presented in
literature review,
describes strengths and
limitations of review,
describes gap in
literature, and purpose
statement. Discusses
consistency between
areas
No themes discussed.
Describes strengths and
limitations of review,
describes gap in
literature, and purpose
statement. Discusses
consistency between all
areas, but one area is
noticeably more weakly
developed or absent
Basic info missing about
two or more areas:
themes in literature
review, gap in literature,
purpose statement, or
evaluation of
consistency among areas
28
Components Excellent Good Fair Poor Omitted Points
1.25 points 1.125 points 1 point 0.875 points 0 points
Target Population,
Sample, and
Sampling Method
1.25 points
Concisely and clearly
describes, sample and
sampling procedure,
target population,
sample, and sampling
method. Discusses
strengths and
limitations of sample
and sampling
procedure
Provides basic
information about
target population,
sample, and sampling
method. Minimal
discussion of sample
and sampling
procedure strengths
or limitations
Overall provides basic
information regarding
target population,
sample, and sampling
method, but one area
is noticeably more
weakly developed or
absent. No
discussion of
strengths or
limitations of sample
and sampling
procedure
Basic information
regarding two or
more of the following
are absent: target
population, sample,
and sampling method
1.25 points 1.125 points 1 point 0.875 points 0 points
Research Design ,
Independent and
Dependent
Variables
1.25 points
Accurately articulates
research design and
key study variables.
Discusses strengths
and limitations of
research design)
Discusses research
design and key study
variables. Limited
discussion of
strengths or
limitations of research
design
Inaccurately
articulates research
design or key study
variables. Discusses
strengths and
limitations of research
design)
Basic information
about two or more of
the following
inaccurate or missing:
research design,
variables, strengths or
limitations of research
design
2.5 points 2.25 points 2 points 1.75 point
s 0 points
Data Collection
Procedure
2.5 points
Concisely provides
detailed information
regarding data
collection process.
Discusses strengths
and limitations
relative to study
purpose
Provides basic
information regarding
data collection
process. Discusses
strengths and
limitations
Provides basic
information about
data collection
process but one or
more key components
of process is missing.
Missing discussion of
strengths
o
r
limitations
Missing two or more
components of data
collection process.
Missing discussion of
strengths and
limitations.
29
Components Excellent Good Fair Poor Omitted Points
2.5 points 2.25 points 2 points 1.75 points 0 points
Outcome
Measures
2.5 points
Insightfully and
concisely provides
information regarding
instruments used to
collect outcome
measures and process
used to evaluate
reliability and validity
of instruments
Provides basic
information about
instruments used to
collect outcome
measures. Discusses
reliability or validity
evaluation
Provides basic
information about
instruments used to
collect outcome
measures. No
discussion of
reliability or validity
evaluation
Limited information
about instruments
used to collect
outcome measures.
No discussion of
reliability or validity
evaluation
1.25 points 1.125 points 1 point 0.875 points 0 points
Protection of
Participants’
Rights
1.25 points
Uses 3 ethical
principles to provide
information regarding
specific measures
taken to protect
participants’ rights
and minimize risks of
harm and identified
measures that could
have been taken but
were not)
Does not discuss 3
principles, but
provides basic
information regarding
measures taken to
protect participants’
rights and minimize
risks of harm
Minimum
information regarding
measures taken to
protect participants’
rights and minimize
risks of harm
No information
regarding measures
taken to protect
participants’ rights
and minimize risks of
harm
2.5 points 2.25 points 2 points 1.75 points 0 points
Data Analysis
Procedure
2.5 points
Insightfully and
concisely provides
step by step
information regarding
data analysis process
including preparation
of data, statistical
and/or non
-statistical
processes used, level
of significance set and
procedures for
ensuring accuracy of
analysis and
interpretation.
Discusses strengths
and limitations of
analysis process
Provides basic
information regarding
data analysis process,
level of significance
set and procedures for
ensuring accuracy of
analysis and
interpretation.
Discusses strengths
and limitations of
analysis process
Provides basic
information regarding
data analysis process,
level of significance
set and procedures for
ensuring accuracy of
analysis and
interpretation.
Discusses strengths
and limitations of
analysis process but
one area noticeably
less well developed
Provides basic
information regarding
data analysis process,
level of significance
set and procedures for
ensuring accuracy of
analysis and
interpretation.
Discusses strengths
and limitations of
analysis process, but
two or more areas
weakly developed
30
Components Excellent Good Fair Poor Omitted Points
2.5 points 2.25 points 2 points 1.75 points 0 points
Major Findings
2.5 points
Insightfully and
concisely discusses
major findings relative
to key variables,
believability of
findings, implications
as described by study
authors, study
limitations, and
provides rationale for
conclusions
Provides basic
information about
major findings,
implications as
described by study
authors, study
limitations, and
provides rationale for
conclusions
Provides basic
information about
major findings,
implications as
described by study
authors, study
limitations, and
provides rationale for
conclusions but one
area is absent or
noticeably less
developed
Two or more of the
following is missing:
basic information
about major findings,
implications as
described by study
authors, study
limitations, or
rationale for
conclusions
1.25 points 1.125 points 1 point 0.875 points 0 points
Conclusion
1.25 points
Conclusion
summarizes major
points and articulates
relevance of findings
from research
critiques to evidencebased practice
Provides basic
information about
one or two major
points. Relevance of
critiques to EBP
included.
Minimum information
about major points.
Relevance to EBP
poorly articulated.
No information about
major points and/or
no mention of
relevance to EBP
1.25 points 1.125 points 1 point 0.875 points 0 points
Organization
1.25 points
Organization is logical
and coherent, making
insightful connections
among ideas
Organization is logical
and coherent, clearly
making connections
among ideas
Organization is
limited,
demonstrating serious
problems with
coherence or
progression of ideas
Organization is so
limited that the piece
is difficult, if not
impossible, to
understand
1.25 points 1.125 points 1 point 0.875 points 0 points
Mechanics
1.25 points
Is free of most errors
in grammar and
mechanics. No more
than 2 quotes
Shows control of
grammar and
mechanics but may
display some errors. .
No more than 2
quotes
Repeated errors in
grammar and
mechanics interfere
with the writer’s
purpose. Three to five
quotes
Errors in grammar &
mechanics make it
difficult, if not
impossible, to
understand. Six or
more quotes
31
Components Excellent Good Fair Poor Omitted Points
1.25 points 1.125 points 1 point 0.875 points 0 points
Originality Score
1.25points
Originality score less
than 25%
Originality score 25-
27%
Originality score 27.1
to 29.9%
Originality score 30%
or more
1.25 points 1.125 points 1 point 0.875 points 0 points
Evidence
1.25points
Evidence is
substantial, specific
and/or illustrative
with sophisticated
ideas that are
particularly well
developed and
supported. Uses at
least 3 relevant
sources beyond study
critiqued (total of 4
sources)
Evidence is sufficient
and consistent with
ideas that are well
developed and
supported. Uses at
least 2 relevant peerreviewed articles
beyond study
critiqued.
(total of 3 sources)
Evidence is adequate
to explain some key
concepts but may lack
sufficient supporting
details. Uses at least 1
relevant peerreviewed article
beyond study
critiqued. (total of 2
sources)
Contains little or no
evidence to support
ideas. Does not use
any articles beyond
study critiqued.
(fewer than 2 sources)
1.25 points 1.125 points 1 point 0.875 points 0 points
Use of Sources/
Documentation
1.25points
Uses varied and
sufficient sources
effectively and
documents accurately
using APA format
Uses sufficient
sources and
documents accurately
using APA format
Lacks depth in
research for the issue;
inconsistently
incorporates and/or
documents sources
using APA format
Fails to document
sources or uses
inappropriate sources