Critically review the below article and identify its merits for practice.

Assignment Title:                Insert information

Unit Code and Title:            Insert information

Lecturer /Tutor:                   Insert Information   

Student Name:                    Insert information                                                               

Student Number:                Insert information

Date of Submission:            Insert information

Word Count:                         Insert information

Task: Critically review the below article and identify its merits for practice. This article can be found with the assessments tab for NCS1202D:

Coppell, K., Abel, S., Freer, T., Gray, A., Sharp, K., Norton, J., Spedding, T., Ward, L. and Whitehead, L. (2017). The effectiveness of a primary care nursing-led dietary intervention for prediabetes: a mixed methods pilot study. BMC Family Practice, 18(1).

Use paragraphs under each heading to critique the article. Refer to the questions under the headings for the content that needs to be discussed within your paragraphs.  NB you DO NOT need an introduction or conclusion for this component of the assignment or in-text references.

1. Title, Authors and Abstract

  • Does the title reflect the content?
  • Are the authors credible?
  • Did the abstract contain sufficient information about the stages of the research process (e.g. the aims, research approach, participants, data collection, data and analysis and findings)

2.  Literature review

  • Is the literature review comprehensive and up-to-date?
  • Are the stated gaps in the reviewed literature identified?
  • Are the aims/ objectives stated and what are they?

NB: as this is a mixed-methods paper you will need to have a paragraph on both the quantitative and qualitative components of the paper

3. Quantitative method 

            a. Quantitative data collection

  • How were the data collected (questionnaires etc.)?
  • Who collected the data?
  • Is the data adequately described?
  • What is the origin of the instrument and has this been provided?
  • Is the instrument described in terms of being valid/reliable?
  • Were ethical issues discussed?

b. Quantitative data analysis

  • Are descriptive or inferential statics used?
  • Does the method of data analysis appear valid and reliable?

4. Qualitative method

a.Qualitative data collection

  • Are the data collection strategies appropriate for the research question?
  • Is the topic of interest focused on human experience within the natural setting?
  • How were the participants and setting selected (e.g. sampling strategies)?
  • Was confidentiality of participants assured?
  • How was anonymity of participants assured?
  • What ethical issues were identified in the study?
  • Is the method of data collection auditable?

b. Qualitative data analysis

  • How were the data analysed?
  • Is the analysis technique congruent with the research question/?
  • Is there evidence that the researcher captures the participants meaning? i.e. did they repeat the information back to the participant?
  • Did the research test for credibility, confirmability?

5. Findings

  • Are the results presented in a clear way?
  • Does the researcher link the findings to existing literature?
  • Identify any gaps or limitations in the study.
  • Were suggestions made for future research?
  • Did the researcher mention the implication to healthcare?
  • Can the results be generalised or transferred?

6. Conclusion of the article

  • Is the conclusion of the article comprehensive?

7. Based on your critique of the article please undertake the following: 

  • Briefly in your own words summarise the study identifying weaknesses and strengths. This can be achieved by identifying which questions from the above headings have been answered within the article and which ones have not.
    • Consider the relevance of the article to clinical practice.

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

Posted in Uncategorized