Critical Appraisal of Qualitative Journal Article

2199 Words5 Pages

Introduction Everyone possess critical thinking skills but when it comes to criticize a journal article it can be difficult for the first time, one of the best ways to develop critical thinking and reading skills is to use some strategies when reading and evaluating a research study (Wood & Haber,1998). The following essay it is going to focus in a critique of a qualitative journal article by giving its strengths and weakness, critical appraisal it is going to be done with support from different references and frameworks relevant to a qualitative study. Title Crombie & Davies (1997) stated that the article title gives an understanding of what the study is going to be about and the author intentions of how the study will be done. The current article title generates a form a ‘relation-ship’ between radiographer and patient which represent a dependant variable and also has been expressed into a declarative format rather than a question format (Wood & Haber 1998). It also gives an idea about the method used for this study which is Transactional Analysis (Booth, 2007) and is written in a comprehensive way which engages the reader to have a look further throughout the article. In previous observational study (Booth & Manning, 2005) found that Transactional Analysis can be effectively used for identifying radiographers communication and behaviour within the department. Author name appears under the title but its professional occupation is not mentioned and therefore the question arises if the author is by profession radiographer or has a background in radiography, however the journal is peer-reviewed with all dates available since receiving the article to its availability online (Bassett, 2004). Abstract From abstract of article... ... middle of paper ... ... used a broad and a variety of literature review but looking on the reference list some of the literature is ten or more than ten years old which in this case cannot give enough support to the study, however Booth (2007) explain the factors that might affect communication in radiography and she gives some suggestion of how this problems might be solved. She does discuss the study clinical relevance and recommendation for further studies is stated. Overall the study can be categorised as a good qualitative study with a few pitfalls and also researcher is well informed and organised in conducting a qualitative study, the present article has a little value in radiography and probably further studies in this matter can give different results in relation to radiographer’s communication with the patients. The actual findings are not applicable to Evidence Based Practice.

Open Document