Article One

Romeo, E. M. (2010). Quantitative Research on Critical Thinking and Predicting Nursing Students’ NCLEX-RN Performance. Journal of Nursing Education. Vol 49, No. 7.

Quantitative

Results

Data Analysis

The article has a well-analyzed data. It gives methods that were used to assess student’s critical thinking abilities and how often the methods were used. The article also provides a comparison of the findings to the previous results. The comparison aspect is essential for any research as it helps in either accepting or rejecting hypotheses from the earlier studies (Venkatesh, Brown & Bala, 2013).

However, the study does not give details of which data analysis software was used in analyzing the findings. The study does not also indicate the significant level that was used to establish the authenticity of the results. Further, the analysis of data was too theoretical. There were no tables, graphs and charts used hence losing the personal appeal that such figures come with.

Reliability and Validity

The findings of the study are reliable since the measurement of students’ critical abilities was done repeatedly. This was vital in establishing any negative variation from the results. A pilot study is essential in establishing the validity of the data collection tools findings (Martin, Olano-Lizárraga & Saracibar-Razquin, 2016). The validity of the measurement tools for this study was not done since the article does not mention any pilot study that was done to verify the ability of the tools to collect the information expected.

Discussion

Interpretation of Findings

The study interpreted the results clearly. A standard measure was employed in interpreting the findings. For instance, students critical thinking abilities were measured using the California critical thinking disposition inventory and that a score below 280 indicated low essential abilities of thinking while a score above 350 meant a high critical thinking ability. The interpretation is of benefit as it enables the reader of the article to have a clear number of students with different critical thinking abilities.

Implications/ Recommendations

The study does not give the implication of the findings on the learners’ critical thinking abilities. The article gives a clear recommendation of what should be done to help the students with low critical thinking abilities so that they can improve their skills (Romeo, 2010). Good research must identify gaps that have not been filed and propose them for further research (Venkatesh et al, 2013). The article, therefore, has a limitation since it does not propose areas that should be considered for further research.

Global Issues

Presentation

The study has a good display. The findings are compared to the global, regional and local studies that were previously conducted. The general to specific approach is essential for establishing trends at different geographical levels.

Researcher Credibility

The study is very credible. Different data collection methods were employed to establish the consistency of findings. Also, the researcher used various sources of data both primary and secondary, to verify the accuracy of data from previous studies (Romeo, 2010). Moreover, different theoretical perspectives were employed to interpret the findings hence having a holistic approach to the study.

Summary

A summary is an essential component of the research as it gives a brief overview of the study findings. The study lacks a summary; hence a reader is forced to read through the whole document in getting the significant study findings.

Article Two

Martin, J.M., Olano-Lizárraga, M & Saracibar-Razquin, M. (2016). The Experience of Family Caregivers Caring for a Terminal Patient at Home: A Research Review. International Journal of Nursing Studies 64: 1-12

Qualitative

Results

Data Analysis

The article has a systematic data analysis procedure. It illustrates methods that were used to assess the experience of caregivers in caring for terminal patients. The article also gives a comparison of the findings to that of other studies that were carried out previously. To enhance personal appeal; the analyzed data is presented in table forms hence breaking the theoretical monotony.

Also, the article is clear as it states that qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the data. However, it fails to give the significant level that was used to confirm or reject a hypothesis or other research findings that were previously done.

Reliability and Validity

The article used a large number of respondents; hence the findings were reliable and qualified to be generalized to the whole study population. Also, the validity of the research tools was done as a pilot experimental study was conducted with the aid of establishing the likelihood of leaving out relevant data during the main investigation.

Discussion

Interpretation of Findings

The study interpreted the results. A standard measure was employed in interpreting the findings. According to Venkatesh, Brown & Bala (2013), the interpretation is of benefit as it enables the reader of the article to establish the criteria that were used in confirming or refuting previous study findings. The article used tables to interpret what the responses meant to the general study.

Implications/ Recommendations

The article clearly describes the role of the study findings in guiding the caregivers of patients with terminal illnesses on strategies they should adopt to ensure quality services that will enhance the wellness of the patients. The study also has clear recommendations that are derived from the findings. For instance, the researcher recommends that caregivers should be financially and morally supported as most of them reported inadequate support from the community. Furthermore, the study identifies a gap that should be considered for further study which is an essential feature of any excellent research (Ioannidis, Fanelli, Dunne & Goodman, 2015). The researcher recommends that the role of researchers’ beliefs and suppositions in influencing caregivers responses should be researched since it is likely to affect the study findings (Martin, Olano-Lizárraga & Saracibar-Razquin, 2016).

Global Issues

Presentation

The study has an excellent presentation. Global, regional and local data from past studies were incorporated in the study for comparison purposes. Also, a good presentation format with major components presented in their universally recognized order was integrated into the study.

Researcher Credibility

The article findings are very credible. Credibility is measured by the degree to which a researcher employs various data collection tools, various respondents and numerous data sources that are approved as reliable information sources (Venkatesh et al., 2013).

The study employed both primary and secondary data sources. Also, different respondents were involved in the study: both caregivers and healthcare providers. However, the study failed to incorporate theoretical perspectives in the interpretation of its results, an aspect that could have influenced the omission of arguments that are essential for the research.

Summary

The article is simple to understand and very comprehensive though it does not have a summary. This means that the consumer of the information will be forced to read through the whole work sieving out the significant findings of the study.

References

Ioannidis, J. P. A., Fanelli, D., Dunne, D. D., & Goodman, S. N. (2015). Meta-research:                    Evaluation and improvement of research methods and practices. PLoS Biology, 13(10),    e1002264. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002264

Martin, J.M., Olano-Lizárraga, M & Saracibar-Razquin, M. (2016). The Experience of         Family Caregivers Caring for a Terminal Patient at Home: A Research Review.     International Journal of Nursing Studies 64: 1-12

Romeo, E. M. (2010). Quantitative Research on Critical Thinking and Predicting Nursing             Students’ NCLEX-RN Performance. Journal of Nursing Education. Vol 49, No. 7.

Venkatesh, V., Brown, S. A. & Bala, H. (2013). Bridging the qualitative-quantitative            divide: Guidelines for conducting mixed methods research in information systems. MIS    Quarterly, 37(1), 21-54. doi:10.25300/MISQ/2013/37.1.02