Appendix 1: Caldwell, Henshaw & Taylor (2005) Framework
| Title | A phenomenological study of families with drug-using children living in the society |
| Does the title reflect its content? | The title duly reflects its content. |
| Are the authors credible? | The research was conducted by credible authors. Apart from the article authors affiliated to university or academic institution, they focus on family and community health nursing. Therefore, the authors can be adjudged to be credible. |
| Does the abstract summarise the key components? | The article has an abstract, which provides the background to the study, methods, result and conclusion to the study. |
| Is the rationale for undertaking the research clearly defined? | The article enumerated clearly its rationale. |
| Is the literature review comprehensive and up-to-date? | The article did not provide a comprehensive literature review of the existing literature. Although the article highlighted some studies, a comprehensive literature review would have enabled readers to identify the literature gap and evaluate the rationale for the study. |
| Is the aim of the research clearly stated? | The article stated its aim and objectives, which is to evaluate the experiences of families with drug-using children. |
| Are all ethical issues identified and addressed? | The authors – Wiarsih et al. (2017) – obtained ethical approval from the Faculty of Nursing of the University of Indonesia before executing the study. Similarly, the participants’ informed consent was obtained before their inclusion in the research. |
| Is the study design clearly identified, and is the rationale for choice of the design evident? | The study adopted a qualitative research method and a descriptive phenomenological qualitative design but provided no justification for this choice. |
| Is there an experimental hypothesis clearly stated? Are the key variables clearly identified? | The article did not clearly state its experimental hypotheses, but key variables were measured clearly. |
| Is the population identified? | The population was duly identified. |
| Is the sample size adequately described and reflective of the population? | A sample size of seven participants, four men and three women, it did not state whether data saturation was attained for this sample size. |
| Is the method of data collection valid and reliable? | The article utilised multiple data collection methods, notably field notes, interview and tape recorders. However, the instruments were not validated. |
| Is the method of data analysis valid and reliable? | The article adopted thematic analysis for its data analysis. It identified seven themes: parental or family’s feeling, family’s stigma, family’s coping mechanism, family’s load experience, ways to solve the problem, family support, and family expectation. |
| Are the results presented in a way that is appropriate and clear? | The research findings were presented in a clear and concise manner. |
| Is the discussion comprehensive? | The discussion was comprehensive and covered all the identified themes. |
| Is the conclusion comprehensive? | The article has a comprehensive conclusion. |
| Are the results generalisable? | The small sample size limits the generalisability of the research findings. |