How do you critique a study on a qualitative research study?

the study concerned is a grounded study by Malm and Hallberg entitled "Patients experiences of daily living with a pacemaker

How do you critique a study on a qualitative research study?
In critiquing any study (qualitative or quantitative) you need to look at the methodology and analysis of the study and then write up the pros and cons of it, often to back up an argument of whether or not the study has provided valuable insight into what it claims to.


Try to look at the prominent aspects of the study-first of all things like the sample/participants recruited. Often studies generalise their results to everyone when in fact their partcipants were all white and middle class! How did they recruit participants? Were both males and females studied (if necessary)? Do you think the participants are representative of the general population they claim to represent (in your case it will be people who wear pacemakers)?


Look at how the data was collected-was it diary studies, individual/group interviews, observations ....? If interviews were used, were the questions open or closed? Obviously open questions allow for more elaboration and hence more personal input from the participants. Who all was present during data collection? For example, a man who is interviewed with his wife present may feel reuctant to give information which potrays him as weak and may not report negative experiences of wearing the pacemaker. Also, the gender and age of the researcher/interviewer can affect responses from participants in a variety of ways.


Do you agree with the researchers analysis of the data? Qualitative studies are much more subjective than quantitative ones and so data analysis will almost always be at least partly a personal reflection of the attitudes and values of the researcher(s). Do you think their conclusions about the data are logical and insightful, or do you think that they fail to stem from the data actually collected?


There are so many areas of a qualitative study that can be critiqued (and indeed any study!) and it's best to look at the basic components of the study to see if they then coherently and logically contribute to the analysis and conclusion. All reports on studies should also be partly self-critical-have the researchers pointed out their studies own flaws and suggested improvements? Hopefully this will help you have an idea of how to go about critiquing a study. Just be sure to present pros and cons, but formulate these in to some kind of argument about the value of the study and its methodology.


Good Luck!

broken teeth