Qualitative Study Critique : Hormonal Contraception and Obesity

Guideline for Qualitative Research Article Critique

A 14-Step Summary of Research Reviews

Read through the questions in the 14 steps below. Next, skim through the review noting those portions which appear to be related to the questions. Then, on the second and more through reading, fill in the blanks using brief answers. Some of the items may not apply to the particular review at hand, and some important observations you can make about your review may not be touched on by any of the questions. Use this form as a guide to reading reviews, not as a comprehensive list of significant content. Remember your notes must be in three pages or less.  Don’t be tempted to run onto additional pages or to make the font any smaller or larger than 12 point. If you need a little more room, you may delete these instructions (as long as you follow them!).

Group’s Name:  ________________________________________________    Date: _________________

What study is this? (Record a FULL reference citation in APA format.)
     
Who is the investigator? Include personal history, particularly as related to the purpose, participants, or site of the study.
     
If made explicit, what type qualitative research is this? Is the author working from a feminist, Marxist, interpretivist, symbolic interactionist, critical theorist, or other vantage point?
   
What is the purpose of the study? What are the focusing questions (if any)? Is the purpose primarily theoretical, practical, or personal?
     
Where does the study take place and who are the participants? Describe the general physical and social context of the setting and salient characteristics of the main actors. If this is not a field study, describe the setting and participants presented in the secondary data source.
   
How were data collected? Was recording done through observation and field notes, taped interviews with transcription, document analysis with record forms, or some combination?
   
If this was a field study, what was the author’s role while collecting data?
   
What procedures were used for analysis of data? Was constant comparison used, were categories developed inductively, were themes constructed, and was computer software employed?
   
What were the results? In general terms, what is the answer to the question, “What was going on there?”
   
How are design or research methods used to enhance the credibility (trustworthiness and believability) of the study?
   
What parts of the study did you find powerful or particularly instructive? What was moving or striking and what provided new insight?
   
Was one or more theoretical frameworks discussed as being related to the study or the findings? If so, describe.
   
Terms that you didn’t understand or questions you have.
   
In what sequence did the major elements of the study occur? Describe (or diagram in graphic format such as a flow chart) timing, frequency, order and relationships used in organizing the study.
   

Sim 5/2020

                                                                    Sequence Flow Chart

Reference

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>