Critique of Research Studies – Part 2

Critique of Research Studies – Part 2

Method Critique

The Article

Banaser, M., Stoddart, K., & Cunningham, N. (2017.). A qualitative study of patient satisfaction in oncology wards setting in Saudi Arabia. Research & Reviews: Journal of Nursing and Health Sciences, 3(3), 85-97.

A qualitative study exhibits a comprehensive research procedure to reflect effectiveness in answering the adopted research question. Banaser, Stoddart, & Cunning (2017) begin their method section by clearly stating the utilization of a qualitative approach with semi-structured interpreters of patients’ opinions on their experiences within a hospital. They integrated the Patient Experience Model and Donabedian quality framework by Stretch and Reimann to give a conceptual framework. This arrangement makes the research technique less erroneous. Besides, the researchers highlight the formulated questions to help patients provide detailed opinions. However, they fail to indicate the samples of the items used. The adult female and male oncology wards within the Saudi Cancer Center were the settings of the research. This setting is recommendable because it does directly relate to the study’s purpose. It is advantageous for the authors to utilize the environment since it is located within their focus, Saudi Arabia.

Participants’ rights were highly considered during this exploration. Researchers were interested in individuals 18 and above, who were mentally fit and aware of their medical condition. They consented and performed recruitment through direct contact. With this, it is evident that the participants willingly took part in the research. A limitation of the investigation is that the researchers do identify with their subjects appropriately. Notable elements of a qualitative research design require researchers to be engaged intensely and become the research instrument (Polit & Beck, 2012). The study’s sample size is well described. It entails adequate details of how participants got recruited. A reader can evaluate the recruitment process and its appropriateness. However, the work does not assess, explore, and describe any philosophical orientation, qualitative theories, framework, research paradigm, or ideological underpinning, considering that the qualitative research technique field is vast. Thus, one can argue that the work lacks systematic procedures and explanations. There is no evaluation of the methodology’s pros and cons, but most importantly, the qualitative technique is justified.

The Article

Karaca, A., & Durna, Z. (2019). Patient satisfaction with the quality of nursing care. Nursing Open, 6(2), 535-545

The exploration starts by stating that it utilizes a cross-sectional descriptive study. However, Karaca & Durna (2019) do not elaborate on the employed research design; hence, they fail to address or identify its potential limitation. Whether the approach to analysis is either qualitative or quantitative method is absent. Before data collection, the study’s protocol was approved after review by a scientific ethics committee. Nursing research upholds ethical principles because it involves humans as the study participants; thus, protecting their rights must be exercised (Polit & Beck, 2012). The researchers obtained permission from the relevant hospital administrators to conduct their work. Additionally, the patients gave written consent to engage in the exploration willingly. Nevertheless, there is no indication that the researchers did educate their participants about what the research entailed. A proper research technique should educate participants to ensure that there are of recommendable age to understand the exercise (Abel & Wright, 2016). The examination has a drawback of involving participants that Karaca & Durna (2019) only focused on individuals aged above 18 who were not too ill or confused.

The research instrument is fundamental to data collection. The examination utilized a PSNCQQ questionnaire to collect data. It was designed to assess patient satisfaction and measure the anticipated requirement of hospitalized patients. The research instrument is explained in detail. It is a factor that helps overcome some of the study’s limitations, for instance, those not asking the appropriate questions to elicit responses that people and their experiences. The selected samples provide inadequate information. The study states that participants were 635 patients hospitalized receiving obstetrics, surgery, internal treatment, and gynecology services at a private health facility (Karaca & Durna 2019, p. 2). On the other hand, it fails to indicate if the hospital or patients were randomly selected, an aspect that could constitute a significant limitation. A research instrument is a means to gather data comprehensively to enable a researcher to perform a unified analysis.

References

Abel, C. H., & Wright, D. (2016). Critiquing quantitative research reports: Key points for the beginner. International Journal of Faith Community Nursing, 2(3), 1-4.

Karaca, A., & Durna, Z. (2019). Patient satisfaction with the quality of nursing care. Nursing Open, 6(2), 535-545.

Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2012). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.