The permit should have been done and then he could have been given that information. There were two people who chose not to be part of the study but this seems to be a violation of privacy.
The design is not the most rigorous, in fact, it seemed rather casual. There is definitely the possibility of doing a quantitative study here that might have been stronger. The interviews were also semi-structured and there is not reference to whether a pre-test was done (McEwen & Wills, 2007). Structured closed ended questions might have given data that was more useful in the end and might have allowed what was needed to build on for more study. 200 women from a maternity clinic were interviewed and that probably is an adequate sample. However, there is mention of questions ask of husbands which is not a part of the original design which concerns the reader that the data may have been affected by these answers. The data was only compared to one other study and that study was done in 1998, so again, there is some concern as to how rigorous this study is.
The sample was taken from one clinic in a single area consisting of 200 women (Browner, Newman, 2010) these same women had been in a previous study. It was done this way to control the study but this may have made it seem less valid. ...
Data Collection and Measurement
The data was collected using open ended questions. There were 33 questions ask and the interviews lasted 30 to 40 minutes and were tape recorded and transcribed. The analysis was done by sorting verbatim material into emergent themes that were described by Dey (1998), a previous researcher. Reliability of the analysis was ensured by a second researcher who independently checked the analysis.
The conceptual and operational definitions are congruent. The interview might have better served the data collection had it been closed ended questions instead of open ended questions.
It was determined that interventions should include leaflets addressed directly to partners, showing risks and the determination of a method to encourage physicians to talk more about smoking cessation in appointments.
Type one error (rejecting the null hypothesis when it is true) as well as type 2 (accepting the null hypothesis when it is false) has been avoided in this paper
Findings are very well summarized and would be easily used in a meta- analysis. The evidence base might be better but is adequate for use with other supportive studies.
There is one set of findings that is not interpreted and that is the information that was gained from the husbands. This information is moved to another study.
Implications are not noted
The study is well written and well organized. It is set up in such a way as to be interesting to the reader. It is not overly long so it maintains interest throughout. It is also a strong nursing subject that brings concern to all of us.