Critical Appraisal
The purpose of this report is to conduct a critical appraisal of a published article.
Carnwell (1997) describes a critical appraisal as an unbiased and balanced
scrutiny of the research paper so that both its strengths and weaknesses are
highlighted. The focus of the appraisal with be on “Promoting the health of
people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; patients and their carer’s
views” (Caress et al, 2010). The format of the appraisal will be formed around a
set of criteria (see appendix 1).
The journal looks at the views of patients and their carer’s experiences with living
the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), its causes, how they manage
with the symptoms, its progression and what role they adopt in maximising their
health potential. Through-out the journal there is a clear emphasise on smoking
being the main cause of COPD, however there is no mention of its significance in
the journal title. Carnwell (1997) clearly states that the title should accurately
reflect on the content of the study.
The journal has three authors, their suitability seems to be quite adequate as
they all have PhD’s, which indicates that they are all educated to a high level and
that they have conducted previous research prior to this article. All the authors
professions lye within nursing which also indicates good clinical knowledge.
However it could be argued that there is no clear emphasis on what topics of
research they were previously involved in nor does it highlight their clinical
expertise in relation to COPD. They have however given a clear indication of being supported by a professor of respiratory medicine, which is very suitable
and credible for the study. Coughlan et al (2007) believes that a research study
should also be evaluated on its own merit and not just on the education of its
authors.
The abstract within a research paper is of great importance as it gives the reader
Carnwell (1997) describes a critical appraisal as an unbiased and balanced
scrutiny of the research paper so that both its strengths and weaknesses are
highlighted. The focus of the appraisal with be on “Promoting the health of
people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; patients and their carer’s
views” (Caress et al, 2010). The format of the appraisal will be formed around a
set of criteria (see appendix 1).
The journal looks at the views of patients and their carer’s experiences with living
the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), its causes, how they manage
with the symptoms, its progression and what role they adopt in maximising their
health potential. Through-out the journal there is a clear emphasise on smoking
being the main cause of COPD, however there is no mention of its significance in
the journal title. Carnwell (1997) clearly states that the title should accurately
reflect on the content of the study.
The journal has three authors, their suitability seems to be quite adequate as
they all have PhD’s, which indicates that they are all educated to a high level and
that they have conducted previous research prior to this article. All the authors
professions lye within nursing which also indicates good clinical knowledge.
However it could be argued that there is no clear emphasis on what topics of
research they were previously involved in nor does it highlight their clinical
expertise in relation to COPD. They have however given a clear indication of being supported by a professor of respiratory medicine, which is very suitable
and credible for the study. Coughlan et al (2007) believes that a research study
should also be evaluated on its own merit and not just on the education of its
authors.
The abstract within a research paper is of great importance as it gives the reader