In order to provide the best possible care for the patients in their care nurses should determine the most effective and accurate handover. Therefore, Analizing the level of data retained or lost from employing different handover methods is crucial.
Here the above paper with be critiqued using the step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 1: quantitative research (Coughlan, Cronin and Ryan, 2007).
In defining quantitative research the term can be dichotomized. Firstly, research refers to creative, systematic work with the intention to increase the knowledge of man and thereby devise new applications (OECD, 2002). In addition Gray (1997) stated that research should improve performance and that the results should be generalizable and be open to critical appraisal. Secondly, quantitative paradigms attempt to measure the event, predict and develop causal explanations to explain the event. Achieved through using an established design based on theory and hypothesis, whereby extensive data is collected, with the attained statistical data analysed using mathematical methods (Creswell, 1994).
Moreover, when applied to this paper, the quantitative research hopes to record the rate of data loss in nursing handover, using data collection and analysis to increase knowledge. Thereby, informing best practice for nurses with regard to handover methods.
The title is accurate, clear, and relates directly to the question posed. In addition, the title contains 12 words thereby avoiding being confusing or misleading as stated by Meehan (1999 cited by Coughlin et al. 2007) and Parahoo (2006 cited by Coughlin et al. 2007).
There are four credited authors for the paper, Pothier, Monteiro, Mooktiar and Shaw. At the time of publishing Pothier worked as a specialist registrar in Otolaryngology. Monteiro and Mooktiar senior house officers (junior doctors training in a speciality) while Shaw worked as a healthcare assistant. So while all of the researchers possess a medical background none of them are nurses, to which the researched type of handover pertains. Therefore, the information denoted importance specifically by nurses may be absent. However, they do have familiarity with the process and terminology,
Examining the paper's abstract showed that it contains an unambiguous overview, with a simple, clear focused purpose stated rationalizing why the research was undertaken. The explanation within the abstract of the methods applied was limited, with no models or clear statement of methodology, other than to state that is was simulated and observed. While, the sample size, frequency and types were all asseverated, the selection was not stated other than to say that the handovers were between nurses and their simulated patients. The findings are clearly cited with percentages and the conclusions and recommendations expressed...