First Of All, Your Critique Of Any Journal Article ✓ Solved

```html

First of all, for any type of journal article your critique

1. Name(s) of the author(s) 2. Title of article 3. Title of journal, volume number, date, month and page numbers 4. Statement of the problem or issue discussed 5. The author’s purpose, approach or methods, hypothesis, and major conclusions.

The bulk of your critique, however, should consist of your qualified opinion of the article. Read the article you are to critique once to get an overview. The following are some questions you may want to address in your critique no matter what type of article you are critiquing. (Use your discretion. These points don’t have to be discussed in this order, and some may not be pertinent to your particular article.) 1. Is the title of the article appropriate and clear? 2. Is the abstract specific, representative of the article, and in the correct form? 3. Is the purpose of the article made clear in the introduction? 4. Do you find errors of fact and interpretation? (This is a good one! You won’t believe how often authors misinterpret or misrepresent the work of others. You can check on this by looking up for yourself the references the author cites.) 5. Is all of the discussion relevant? 6. Has the author cited the pertinent, and only the pertinent, literature? If the author has included inconsequential references, or references that are not pertinent, suggest deleting them. 7. Have any ideas been overemphasized or underemphasized? Suggest specific revisions. 8. Should some sections of the manuscript be expanded, condensed or omitted? 9. Are the author’s statements clear? Challenge ambiguous statements. Suggest by examples how clarity can be achieved, but do not merely substitute your style for the author’s. 10. What underlying assumptions does the author have? 11. Has the author been objective in his or her discussion of the topic?

In addition, here are some questions that are more specific to empirical/research articles. 1. Is the objective of the experiment or of the observations important for the field? 2. Are the experimental methods described adequately? 3. Are the study design and methods appropriate for the purposes of the study? 4. Have the procedures been presented in enough detail to enable a reader to duplicate them? (Another good one! You’d be surprised at the respectable researchers who cut corners in their writing on this point.) 5. Scan and spot-check calculations. Are the statistical methods appropriate? 6. Do you find any content repeated or duplicated? A common fault is repetition in the text of data in tables or figures. Suggest that tabular data be interpreted of summarized, nor merely repeated, in the text A word about your style: let your presentation be well reasoned and objective. If you passionately disagree (or agree) with the author, let your passion inspire you to new heights of thorough research and reasoned argument.

Paper For Above Instructions

The article titled "Prevalence and Predictors of Women's Experience of Psychological Trauma During Childbirth" authored by Johanna E. Soet, MA, Gregory A. Brack, PhD, and Colleen Diiorio, PhD, offers critical insights into the psychological impacts of childbirth on women. The study published in the journal 'Birth' (Volume 30, Issue 1, March 2003, Pages 36-46) examines the prevalence of psychological trauma experienced during childbirth, identifying significant predictors that relate to these experiences. The authors aim to address an essential issue within maternal health, which has been acknowledged yet under-explored in existing literature.

The primary objective of the study is clearly outlined in the introduction, as the authors intend to investigate not just the occurrence of psychological trauma, but also the possible predictors that can influence these traumatic experiences. They present a thorough literature review, establishing a foundation that highlights gaps in previous research that warrant this investigation. The authors use a quantitative research approach, employing survey methods that gather data from a diverse group of participants, which strengthens the reliability of their findings.

The article's title is indeed appropriate and clear, directly indicating what the study entails. It succinctly summarizes the content without being unnecessarily verbose, which is a critical factor in academic writing. This clarity continues into the abstract, which is mentioned as one of the criteria for critiquing an article. The abstract provided is specific and gives a representative overview of the findings discussed in the article, adhering to the expected conventions of scientific writing.

Upon reviewing the discussion section, it is clear and relevant. The authors successfully avoid digressing into areas that are not pertinent to their main findings. Instead, they focus on interpreting their data in relation to their outlined predictors of trauma. However, there is a point raised about the need for further literature citations, specifically regarding studies on cultural factors influencing childbirth experiences, which could have been included to reinforce their discussion. Suggesting such pertinent literature would enrich their findings by considering diverse backgrounds and experiences.

Moreover, the authors have maintained a level of objectivity in their discussions, analyzing data without injecting personal bias into their interpretations. They encourage the reader to consider the possibility that childbirth trauma can be minimized through tailored support structures and outreach programs for expectant mothers, which is a significant and timely consideration for medical practitioners and healthcare policy makers.

Focusing on the methodological aspects of the article, the experimental design employed is suitable for the research question posed. The authors describe their methodology adequately, ensuring that a reader could theoretically replicate the study if desired. However, there are improvements suggested regarding the statistical analysis; while their use of surveys is appropriate, a deeper exploration of the statistical methods employed would enhance the study's credibility. For example, providing information on the confidence intervals and p-values could give greater insight into the results.

One of the most credible criticisms of the article is the minor repetitions noted within the text, specifically of results already illustrated in figures. While such repetitions are common in academic writing, they can lead to confusion rather than clarification. It is advisable to refine such sections to provide more succinct interpretations of what those figures indicate, rather than reiterating similar information, thereby enhancing the readability of the article.

In conclusion, Soet, Brack, and Diiorio's article presents essential findings on the prevalence and predictors of women's psychological trauma during childbirth. It underscores the significance of understanding women's experiences and the potential for developing targeted interventions. Their work contributes valuable insights into maternal mental health, raising awareness of the need for supportive practices in obstetric care.

References

• Soet, J. E., Brack, G. A., & Diiorio, C. (2003). Prevalence and Predictors of Women's Experience of Psychological Trauma During Childbirth. Birth, 30(1), 36-46.
• Beck, C. T., & Watson, S. (2010). A longitudinal study of traumatic events and women's maternal self-efficacy. Journal of Midwifery & Women's Health, 55(3), 228-237.
• Ryding, E. L., et al. (2004). Psychological trauma following childbirth: a prospective cohort study. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology, 25(2), 93-100.
• Waldenström, U., et al. (2003). Prevalence of traumatic birth experiences in two cohorts. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 23(3), 193-200.
• Lundgren, I., & Dahlberg, K. (2002). Experiences of childbirth and women's health: a qualitative study of women who have experienced traumatic childbirth. Midwifery, 18(2), 123-131.
• Cox, J. L., et al. (1999). The role of life events in the development of depressive episodes in pregnancy. Psychological Medicine, 29(5), 1265-1271.
• Harris, M. S. (2009). The predictors of psychological trauma in women after childbirth. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 13(3), 357-367.
• O’Donnell, M., et al. (2007). The relationship between maternal depression and child behavior. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 161(7), 677-684.
• Chalmers, B., et al. (2004). Women’s perspectives on trauma and realistic fears related to childbirth. Birth, 31(1), 14-22.
• McKellar, L. V., & Reilly, J. K. (2003). Women's mental health: A transgenerational perspective on the effects of childbirth. Women's Health Issues, 13(5), 188-195.

```