Critical Review Form - Qualitative Studies Critical Review Form - Qualitative Studies (Version 2.0) ADVANCE \d3© Letts, L., Wilkins, S., Law, M., Stewart, D., Bosch, J., & Westmorland, M., 2007...

Read article fill in critical review form from It


Critical Review Form - Qualitative Studies Critical Review Form - Qualitative Studies (Version 2.0) ADVANCE \d3© Letts, L., Wilkins, S., Law, M., Stewart, D., Bosch, J., & Westmorland, M., 2007 McMaster University CITATION:       Comments STUDY PURPOSE: Was the purpose and/or research question stated clearly? FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no Outline the purpose of the study and/or research question.       LITERATURE: Was relevant background literature reviewed? FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no Describe the justification of the need for this study. Was it clear and compelling?       How does the study apply to your practice and/or to your research question? Is it worth continuing this review?       STUDY DESIGN: What was the design? FORMCHECKBOX phenomenology FORMCHECKBOX ethnography FORMCHECKBOX grounded theory FORMCHECKBOX participatory action research FORMCHECKBOX other _     _____________ Was the design appropriate for the study question? (i.e., rationale) Explain.       Was a theoretical perspective identified? FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no Describe the theoretical or philosophical perspective for this study e.g., researcher’s perspective.       Method(s) used: FORMCHECKBOX participant observation FORMCHECKBOX interviews FORMCHECKBOX document review FORMCHECKBOX focus groups FORMCHECKBOX other _     _____________ Describe the method(s) used to answer the research question. Are the methods congruent with the philosophical underpinnings and purpose?       SAMPLING: Was the process of purposeful selection described? FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no Describe sampling methods used. Was the sampling method appropriate to the study purpose or research question?       Was sampling done until redundancy in data was reached? FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no FORMCHECKBOX not addressed Are the participants described in adequate detail? How is the sample applicable to your practice or research question? Is it worth continuing?       Was informed consent obtained? FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no FORMCHECKBOX not addressed       DATA COLLECTION: Descriptive Clarity Clear & complete description of site: FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no participants: FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no Role of researcher & relationship with participants: FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no Identification of assumptions and biases of researcher:  FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no Describe the context of the study. Was it sufficient for understanding of the “whole” picture?       What was missing and how does that influence your understanding of the research?       Procedural Rigour Procedural rigor was used in data collection strategies? FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no FORMCHECKBOX not addressed Do the researchers provide adequate information about data collection procedures e.g., gaining access to the site, field notes, training data gatherers? Describe any flexibility in the design & data collection methods.       DATA ANALYSES: Analytical Rigour Data analyses were inductive? FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no FORMCHECKBOX not addressed Findings were consistent with & reflective of data? FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no Describe method(s) of data analysis. Were the methods appropriate? What were the findings?       Auditability Decision trail developed? FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no FORMCHECKBOX not addressed Process of analyzing the data was described adequately? FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no FORMCHECKBOX not addressed Describe the decisions of the researcher re: transformation of data to codes/themes. Outline the rationale given for development of themes.       Theoretical Connections Did a meaningful picture of the phenomenon under study emerge? FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no How were concepts under study clarified & refined, and relationships made clear? Describe any conceptual frameworks that emerged.       OVERALL RIGOUR Was there evidence of the four components of trustworthiness? Credibility FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no Transferability FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no Dependability FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no Comfirmability FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no For each of the components of trustworthiness, identify what the researcher used to ensure each.       What meaning and relevance does this study have for your practice or research question?       CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS Conclusions were appropriate given the study findings? FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no The findings contributed to theory development & future OT practice/ research? FORMCHECKBOX yes FORMCHECKBOX no What did the study conclude? What were the implications of the findings for occupational therapy (practice & research)? What were the main limitations in the study?       � When doing critical reviews, there are strategic points in the process at which you may decide the research is not applicable to your practice and question. You may decide then that it is not worthwhile to continue with the review. � Throughout the form, “no” means the authors explicitly state reasons for not doing it; “not addressed” should be ticked if there is no mention of the issue. © Letts et al., 2007 Qualitative Review Form 1.