Critiquing A Qualitative Research Study For This Assignment

Critiquing A Qualitative Research Studyfor This Assignment You Will B

Read your selected journal article entirely. Analyze the journal article and use the specific questions that are outlined in Gray, Grove, and Sutherland (2017) found on the attachment section to construct your analysis of your chosen QUALITATIVE research study. (See Word Attachment) These are the main headers of your paper: 1- Identifying the Steps of the Qualitative Research Process 2- Determination of Strengths and Weaknesses of Qualitative Studies 3- Evaluating a Qualitative Study. You have many questions to address in your assignment. They should be in complete sentences (i.e., bullet point responses are not acceptable!). APA format is required in your assignment Word document. Page length, excluding the title and references list, is between five and seven pages. Minimum two (2) references. Free of plagiarism (Turnitin Assignment).

Paper For Above instruction

The critique of a qualitative research study is an essential exercise in understanding the intricacies, strengths, and limitations inherent in qualitative methodologies. This paper aims to analyze a selected qualitative journal article from the provided list, applying the structured framework outlined by Gray, Grove, and Sutherland (2017). The chosen study for critique is "Visibility and transmission: complexities around promoting hand hygiene in young children: A qualitative study" by Biezen et al. (2019). The analysis encompasses three main sections: identifying the steps of the qualitative research process, determining the strengths and weaknesses of the study, and critically evaluating the study’s overall quality and contribution to nursing knowledge.

Identifying the Steps of the Qualitative Research Process

The first step in critically analyzing a qualitative study involves understanding the systematic process adopted by the researchers. According to Gray et al. (2017), the qualitative research process begins with defining the research problem, conducting a comprehensive literature review, and establishing the theoretical framework. Biezen et al. (2019) initiated their study by exploring the complex behaviors and perceptions surrounding hand hygiene in young children, emphasizing the importance of contextual understanding. They employed a qualitative descriptive methodology, which aligns with the aim to gather rich, detailed insights from participants about their experiences and perceptions.

The researchers utilized purposive sampling to select participants involved in promoting hand hygiene, such as caregivers and health educators. Data collection involved semi-structured interviews, allowing flexibility for participants to express their views and experiences freely. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data analysis was conducted through thematic analysis, which involved coding the transcripts, identifying patterns, and deriving themes that reflected the participants’ perspectives (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Throughout the process, the researchers engaged in constant comparison and reflexivity, ensuring that emerging themes were grounded in the data and that their interpretations remained credible.

Additionally, measures such as member checking and peer debriefing were employed to enhance the study's trustworthiness, exemplifying adherence to qualitative rigor. The study concluded with a comprehensive presentation of themes that elucidate the nuanced complexities of promoting hand hygiene among young children, demonstrating a clear progression through the qualitative research steps—research question formulation, data collection, analysis, and validation.

Determination of Strengths and Weaknesses of Qualitative Studies

One of the key strengths of Biezen et al.'s (2019) study is its in-depth exploration of participants’ perceptions, providing a nuanced understanding of the social and contextual factors influencing behaviors related to hand hygiene. The use of semi-structured interviews allowed for flexibility and depth, capturing diverse perspectives that may have been overlooked with more rigid methodologies. The researchers employed rigorous data analysis techniques, including thematic analysis, which increased the trustworthiness of the findings (Nowell et al., 2017). The incorporation of member checking enhanced credibility, and the detailed presentation of themes offers valuable insights for practitioners aiming to improve hand hygiene promotion strategies.

However, the study also presents certain limitations. A primary weakness is the limited generalizability attributable to the qualitative approach, which inherently focuses on contextualized insights rather than broad applicability. The sample size was relatively small, involving specific geographic locations, and may not reflect diverse populations or different cultural contexts. Furthermore, the potential for researcher bias exists despite reflexivity efforts, as interpretations of the data are subject to subjective influence. Confirmability could be further strengthened through multiple analysts coding the data independently. Lastly, the study’s focus on specific participants may limit the transferability of findings to other settings or populations, emphasizing the need for additional research to corroborate these findings in varied contexts.

Evaluating a Qualitative Study

Critically evaluating Biezen et al.'s (2019) qualitative study reveals its contribution to understanding the complex factors affecting hand hygiene behaviors in children. The study demonstrates a thorough adherence to qualitative research principles, including clear articulation of the research question, strategic sampling, and robust data analysis. The use of thematic analysis provides a systematic approach to identifying key themes, and efforts to ensure trustworthiness enhance the credibility of the results. The findings offer meaningful insights for health educators and policymakers aiming to design culturally and contextually appropriate interventions.

Nonetheless, there are aspects that warrant cautious interpretation. The small, localized sample limits the broader applicability, and the subjective nature of qualitative analysis necessitates acknowledgment of potential researcher bias. The study could benefit from methodological triangulation or inclusion of additional qualitative methods, such as focus groups, to augment data richness. Despite these limitations, the study’s insights contribute valuable contextually grounded knowledge to the field of public health and pediatric nursing.

Overall, the study exemplifies rigorous qualitative inquiry by systematically capturing complex social phenomena and providing a foundation for future research. Its strengths in detailed, participant-driven data are balanced by acknowledged limitations in scope and potential biases. Future studies might expand to multiple settings or incorporate mixed methods to enhance understanding and applicability.

Conclusion

The critique of Biezen et al.'s (2019) qualitative study underscores the importance of methodological rigor and reflexivity in qualitative research. It highlights the need to balance deep contextual understanding with awareness of limitations concerning generalizability. Through systematic steps of the qualitative process, the study offers valuable insights into health-promoting behaviors in children, illustrating the significance of qualitative methods in capturing complex social and behavioral phenomena. Overall, qualitative critiques such as this are crucial for advancing research quality and informing evidence-based practice.

References

  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
  • Gray, J. R., Grove, S. K., & Sutherland, S. (2017). Understanding Nursing Research: Building an Evidence-Based Practice (8th ed.). Elsevier.
  • Biezen, R., Grando, D., Mazza, D., & Brijnath, B. (2019). Visibility and transmission: complexities around promoting hand hygiene in young children: A qualitative study. BMC Public Health, 19(1), 1–12.
  • da Silva Lins, H. N., Macàªdo Paiva, L. K., Gonà§alves de Souza, M., Cassimiro Lima, R. M., & Albuquerque, N. L. A. (2019). Experiences in women’s care: Doulas’ perception. Journal of Nursing UFPE / Revista de Enfermagem UFPE, 13(5), 1264–1269.
  • Mele, B., Goodarzi, Z., Hanson, H. M., & Holroyd-Leduc, J. (2019). Barriers and facilitators to diagnosing and managing apathy in Parkinson’s disease: A qualitative study. BMC Neurology, 19(1), 1–10.
  • Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1-13.
  • Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Sage Publications.
  • Flick, U. (2018). An Introduction to Qualitative Research. Sage Publications.

Related Assignments