not a general nursing paper, writer needs to have sufficient knowledge in nursing 

School of Health Sciences

Diploma in Health Science (Nursing)

NR2_ Research Critique Instructions 1

Research Critique Instructions (80marks; 40%)

1) Choose 1 quantitative research article.

2) The article must address the clinical problem and provide good understanding of the

topic.

3) Do not choose systematic reviews, meta-analysis or qualitative research.

4) The chosen article must be within 5years (2012-2018).

5) Student must critically analysed the article using the sample and guidelines provided

6) Students are encouraged to view the sample critique and marking rubric prior to

writing the assignment.

7) The word limit is 1350 to 1650 words. Two (2) marks will be deducted for every 100

words less or more than the word limit.

8) Please submit hardcopy and Safe Assign critique submission by 5pm, 28 May 2018.

9) 1% will be deducted per day for late submission.

10) 0 mark will be accorded if you fail to submit your assignment 5 days after deadline.

Notes:

1) Students need to include the following points in the assignment:

a. Components from the research article are to be accurately and fully identified

by student

b. Critically analyse whether the components appear to be a strength of the study

or a possible limitation to the implementation of the study’s findings, and

c. Explain for why it is a strength or a limitation.

2) Students may wish to discuss the below critique points for each of the components.

Note that students may provide other relevant points.

Part 1: Article Information

Title: length; relevance to content; clarity (if the component is described clearly)

Abstract: length; clarity; coverage of the information about study

Part 2: Introduction to article

Rationale: clarity; relationship/link to research topic

Background Introduction: coverage of information; statistics provided to support

rationale

Part 3: Literature Review

Literature review: logical organization; conceptual or theoretical framework provided

and/or discussed; balance of review and critique analysis of literature

Themes: clearly explained; relationship and relevance to previous research

School of Health Sciences

Diploma in Health Science (Nursing)

NR2_ Research Critique Instructions 2

Research gaps: clarity; relationship/link to purpose of the study

Part 4: Designing the Research I

Hypotheses or Research questions: relationship/link to research gap and purpose;

clarity on how IV and DV are manipulated or measured; PICO

Aim or Purpose of s

RESEARCH ARTICLE

A Possible Link between Gastric Mucosal
Atrophy and Gastric Cancer after
Helicobacter pylori Eradication
Tomomitsu Tahara*, Tomoyuki Shibata, Noriyuki Horiguchi, Tomohiko Kawamura,
Masaaki Okubo, Takamitsu Ishizuka, Mitsuo Nagasaka, Yoshihito Nakagawa,

Naoki Ohmiya

Department of Gastroenterology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan

* [email protected]

Abstract

Background

The effect of H. pylori eradication in gastric cancer prevention can be attributed to the

improvement of atrophic gastritis, which is a known risk of gastric cancer. However, gastric

cancer has also been diagnosed after long-term H. pylori eradication. This study aimed to

clarify the association between gastric atrophy and gastric cancer after H. pylori eradica-

tion, including its clinicopathological features.

Methods

A total of 55 consecutive patients with 64 early gastric cancers (EGCs) diagnosed after H.

pylori eradication were enrolled. The degree of endoscopic atrophy and the histological

degrees of mononuclear cell infiltration, atrophy, and metaplasia in the corpus and adjacent

mucosa of the EGCs were determined and scored.

Results

The majority of EGCs (63/64) were located within the endoscopically assessed atrophic

mucosa or along the atrophic border. The adjacent mucosa of the EGCs presented signifi-

cantly higher degrees of all histological parameters than in the corpus (mononuclear cell

infiltration, 0.86+/-0.09 vs. 0.51+/-0.11, P = 0.016; atrophy, 1.77+/-0.13 vs. 0.65+/-0.14,

P<0.0001; metaplasia, 1.68+/-0.13 vs. 0.48+/-0.1, P<0.0001). The degree of endoscopic
atrophy improved in the patients with longer post-H. pylori eradication periods; however,

this trend was not observed for the histological parameters, and high degrees of atrophy

and metaplasia were observed in the adjacent mucosa of the EGCs compared with the cor-

pus during all periods (all P<0.05). The histological degrees of atrophy and metaplasia in
the adjacent mucosa were particularly higher in the patients who underwent eradication

due to gastric ulcers.

PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0163700 October 5, 2016 1 / 12

a11111

OPEN ACCESS

Citation: Tahara T, Shibata T, Horiguchi N,

Kawamura T, Okubo M, Ishizuka T, et al. (2016) A

Possible Link between Gastric Mucosal Atrophy

and Gastric Cancer after Helicobacter pylori

Eradication. PLoS ONE 11(10): e0163700.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0163700

Editor: John Green, University Hospital Llandough,

UNITED KINGDOM

Received: June 10, 2016

Acce


Title (4 marks)


1.

Is the PICO stated? If yes,

P: NA

I: Helicobacter Pylori Eradication

C: NA

O: Gastric Mucosal Atrophy and Gastric Cancer

Problem Statement/ Hypothesis (6 marks)

1.

What is/are the problem statement?

To clarify the status of atrophic gastritis at the time point that patients developed gastric cancer after Helicobacter pylori.

2.

What is/are the hypothesis?

NA

3.

What is/are the research Question(s)?

Are there any possibilities that after helicobacter pylori eradication has a link between gastric mucosal atrophy and gastric cancer?

Variables ( 2 marks)

1.

Independent Variable/s

Gastric Mucosal Atrophy and Helicobacter Pylori Eradication

2.

Dependent Variable/s

Gastric Cancer

3.

Other Variables

Research Methodology (7 marks)

1.

Setting

(Country, Hospital, school etc.)

Endoscopy Center of Fujita Health University

2.

Sampling Method

(E.g. probability random sampling)

Purposive Sampling

3.

Target Population

(Age, Gender etc.)

55 consecutive patients with 64 early gastric cancers diagnosed after successful Helicobacter pylori eradication

Gender: Males

4.

Inclusion Criteria/s

NA

5.

Exclusion Criteria/s

NA

6.

Study Design

(e.g. Randomized control trial)

Experimental Design

7.

Tools/Instruments used for outcome measures

(Questionnaires, Weighing Scale, Blood test etc.)

Name

Student No.

Tutorial Group

Plagiarism Disclaimer

I declare that this submission is my own work and that in every case where I have drawn on the work of any other author or source, this is fully and specifically acknowledged in the text of my submission and the works cited in the appended reference list.

Student’s Signature : _______________

Marker’s Name:

Marker’s Signature:

Grade:______________

Date:_________________

A+

68-80

C+

52-55.9

A

64-67.9

C

48-51.9

B+

60-63.9

D+

44-47.9

B

56-59.9

D

40-43.9

F

< 40

Moderator’s Name:

Moderator’s Signature:


Nursing Research 2: Research Critique Template

Use only Quantitative study for this assignment

Title

Is the title clear, accurate and unambiguous?

Is it clearly related to content and appropriate?

Is it of appropriate length?

PICO?

Abstract

Does the abstract offer a clear overview of the study including the research problem,

sample, methodology, finding and recommendations?

Is it clearly presented and well-organised?

Is it of appropriate length?

Part 2: Introduction to article

Background Introduction

Does the introduction provide enough information about the research topic?

Are statistics provided to support rationale?

Rationale

Does the rationale clearly linked to the research topic?

Is it clearly presented and well-explained?

Is the rationale strongly supported?

Part 3: Literature Review

Literature review

Are all the relevant concepts and variables included in the review?

Does the summary follow a logical sequence?

Are primary sources mainly used?

Is there a balance of review and critique analysis of literature?

Does the review follow the

Research Critique Written Assignment Nursing Research 2 School of Health Sciences, Nursing

Critique_Marking_Guide 1

Name ________________________________________Student No____________________________________

Author________________________________

Journal_________________________________________________

Research Paper Title_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Year___________________________Volume___________________________Issue_______________________Page________________________________

Research Critique Instructions (80marks; 40%)

 Choose 1 quantitative research article.

 The article must address the clinical problem and provide good understanding of the topic.

 Do not choose systematic reviews, meta-analysis or qualitative research.

 The chosen article must be within 5years (2012-2018).

 Student must critically analysed the article using the sample and guidelines provided. Components from the research article to be accurately and fully

identified by student. There is a need to explain why it is a strength or a limitation.

 The word limit is 1350 to 1650 words. Two (2) marks will be deducted for every 100 words less or more than the word limit.

 Please submit hardcopy and Safe Assign critique submission by 5pm, 28 May.

 1% will be deducted per day for late submission.

 0 mark will be accorded if the submission is after 3 June 2017.

Research Critique Written Assignment Nursing Research 2 School of Health Sciences, Nursing

Critique_Marking_Guide 2

Marking criteria:
Scores 0 – 1

Poorly developed

2 – 4

Acceptable

5 – 7

Good

8 – 10

Well developed

 Description of components
absent/inaccurately
illustrated.

 0-1 strength or limitation is
mentioned for some of the

components.

 Explanations of the strengths
and limitations for each of

the respective components

are absent.

 Description of components
present but incomplete/not
fully accurate.

 At least 1 strength or
limitation is mentioned for

most of the components.

 Explanations of the
strengths and limitations for

each of the respective

components are absent.

 Description of
components accurately

and fully identified.

 At least 2 strengths or
limitations are mentioned

for each of the respective

sections.

 Explanations of the
strengths and limitations

for each of the respective

sections are absent.

 Description of components
accurately an

1

NR2 _ Research Critique Template

Part 1: Article Information

Title

Is the title clear, accurate and unambiguous?

Is it clearly related to content and appropriate?

Is it of appropriate length?

PICO?

The title is forthright and easy to understand with all the simple words used. From the

title, it can be easily concluded that the article is exploring that how the smoking history

and motivation to quit affect schizophrenia patients in the smoking cessation programs.

The length of the title is 15 words, which is within the adequate word range of a title

(Knight & Ingersoll,1996). In addition, PICO (population, intervention, comparison and

outcome) were indicated in the title except the comparison is not shown since it is not

applicable in this article.

Abstract

Does the abstract offer a clear overview of the study including the research

problem, sample, methodology, finding and recommendations?

Is it clearly presented and well-organised?

Is it of appropriate length?

2

NR2 _ Research Critique Template

The abstract is divided into different parts by using the subheadings on the basis of

giving a clear overview of the study. According to the different subheadings given such

as objective, method, results, and conclusion, it make the readers easy to read and

understand the contents. In the objective’s part, the aim of this study is stated in a very

clear manner. Moreover, method and results are explained while all the study design,

targeted population and outcomes are present in the parts. In the conclusion part,

smoking cessation program focus points were given based on the findings. Meanwhile,

the length of the abstract met the word range requirement for most scholarly journals,

which is from 75 to 300 words (Knight & Ingersoll,1996).

Part 2: Introduction to article

Background Introduction

Does the introduction provide enough information about the research topic?

Are statistics provided to support rationale?

In the introduction part, massive information was provided to prove the poor outcomes

of the previous smoking cessation programs and indicate that motivation to change was

affected by many factors. Some statistics were provided for proving the need of

improvement smoking cessation programs and low motivation to change for the

schizophrenic smokers.

Rationale

3

NR2 _ Research Critique Template

Does the rationale clearly linked to