Imagine you are on an EBP Project Team with the EBP Question in Part 1.
While reading the article by Tharani et al., appraise it and assign a Level and Quality rating (most of Part 1. is already completed). NOTE THIS IS A MINI-APPRAISAL and does NOT require the work done on your QUANTtitative Appraisal Tool
Part 1. Article Information
Evidence level I II III bold answer
Quality Rating A B C bold answer
Article Citation APA formatted
Tharani, A., Husain, Y., & Warwick, I. (2017). Learning environment and emotional well-being: A qualitative study of undergraduate nursing students. Nurse Education Today, 59, 82-87, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2017.09.008.
Setting (city/state/country, hospital/clinic/school, etc.)
Sample (size & demographics – age, gender, etc.)
EBP Team Question: In undergraduate nursing students, what is the impact of student-centered teaching strategies and faculty support on improving student experience and increasing well-being?
Qualitative Research Definition (collection, analysis, and reporting of narrative data)
Rich narrative data are used for uncovering themes; describes a problem or condition from the point of view of those experiencing it. Common methods are focus groups, individual interviews (unstructured or semi structured), and participation/observations. Sample sizes are small and data collection stops when data saturation is reached (when no new themes emerge). Synthesis is used in data analysis. The researcher describes, analyzes, and interprets reports, descriptions, and observations from participants.
Part 2. Determine the LEVEL of this Research (Study Design)
Refer to TABLE A on Page 3. Bold the Level in Part 1.
Part 3. How does this study help answer the EBP question?
three brief bullets only
Part 4. Appraise the QUALITY of this Qualitative Research Evidence
INSTRUCTIONS: BOLD YES OR NO TO EACH QUESTION.
EXPLAIN OR DESCRIBE EACH ANSWER VERY BRIEFLY with 1 or 2 sentences
Was the phenomenon (concept researchers were trying to understand) clearly described in the Introduction? Yes No
Was the purpose/aim of the study clear in the Introduction? Yes No
Did researchers explain why they chose a qualitative design instead of quantitative? Yes No
Did researchers describe the setting(s) adequately? Yes No
Were participant characteristics adequately described? Yes No
Was the data collection method clear (obtaining participant responses)? Yes No
Did researchers describe how data was transcribed & analyzed? Yes No
Explain the process:
In Results were themes identified from the participant responses? Yes No
Did the discussion thoroughly explore the results? Yes No
Are the researcher’s conclusions clearly explained? Yes No
Do you find the study and its results to be trustworthy? Yes No
Total Yes or No answers
Based on the overall yes answers AND referring to Table B below, rate the QUALITY of this research evidence as A, B, or C. In EBP we only use A (high) or B (good) evidence to influence our decisions. BOLD the Quality Rating in Part 1.
TABLE A: Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice
Modified Evidence Level Guide for NUR 363 Appraisals
Experimental study, randomized controlled trial (RCT)
Opinion of respected authorities and/or nationally recognized expert committees or panels:
Clinical practice guidelines
Consensus panels/position statements
Based on experiential and non-research evidence which includes:
Integrative reviews or Literature reviews
Quality improvement, program, or financial evaluation
Opinion of nationally recognized expert(s) based on experiential evidence
TABLE B: Qualitative Research Quality Rating Scale
NOTE: No commonly agreed-on principles exist for judging the quality of qualitative studies. It is a subjective process based on the extent to which study data contributes to synthesis and how much information is known about the researchers’ efforts to meet the appraisal criteria.
A/B High/Good quality: The article discusses efforts to enhance or evaluate the quality of the data and the overall inquiry in sufficient detail; and it describes the specific techniques used to enhance the quality of the inquiry. Evidence of some or all of the following is found:
● Transparency: Researcher describes how information was documented to justify decisions, how data were reviewed by others, and how themes and categories were formulated.
● Diligence: Researcher reads and rereads data to check interpretations; seeks opportunity to find multiple sources to corroborate evidence.
● Verification: Researcher uses a process of checking, confirming, and ensuring methodologic coherence.
● Self-reflection and self-scrutiny: Researcher continuously aware of how his/her experiences, background, or prejudices might shape and bias analysis and interpretations.
● Participant-driven inquiry: Participants shape the scope and breadth of questions; analysis and interpretation give voice to those who participated.
● Insightful interpretation: Researcher links data and knowledge in meaningful ways to relevant literature.
C Lower-quality: studies contribute little to the overall review of findings and have few, if any, of the features listed for High/Good quality.