Please boost your Plan to download papers
Critique of a published research paper
Pages 12 (3012 words)
Critique of a published research paper Study type In this review I will analyze a randomized experimental, mixed design (quantitative and qualitative) study conducted in clinical settings (Shadish et al 2002). It is experimental study because it tries to test a hypothesis on a randomized cohort group of surgeons, anesthesiologists and other staff in the operational room, in clinical settings in one hospital…
2004). Title The title of the study conducted by Nick Sevdalis, Andrew N. Healey and Charles A. Vincent (Nick et al. 2006) is well defined, concise and the reader can effectively understand the topic of this study only by reading the title. The title is informative because it is telling us that the subject of this study is which is important information for future researchers (Polit and Beck 2008). However even though I can clearly understand the subject of this study I can understand very little about the character of this study and the methods they used so based on the title I can’t determine if it is a systematic review, experimental study. Researchers Qualifications Nick et al. 2006 have the appropriate professional qualifications for conduction of this study. This is important because of the character of the research method adopted by the authors. Subject of this study is analysis of communication within the operating room and identification of eventual events that may distract the normal functioning of the surgeon, anesthesiologist or other members present in the operating room. In order to achieve adequate and reliable assessment there is a need of professionals, trained to recognize the subtitle communications within the operation room. ...
Not exactly what you need?