Annotated Bibliography
Gallacher, K., May, C.R., Montori, V.M., & Mair, F.S. (2011). Understanding patients’ experiences of treatment burden in chronic heart failure using normalization process theory. Annals of Family Medicine, 9(3), 235-243.
The main purpose of this qualitative study was not only to evaluate the burden linked to treatment among patients with reported chronic heart failure but also to verify if Normalization Process Theory (NPT) is a helpful model to assist in the description of treatment burden components found among these patients. The study utilized a sample of 47 patients with chronic heart failure and secondary analysis was done on their initial qualitative interview data to determine the components according to the NPT model. Using NPT, the main components of treatment burden in patients with chronic heart failure were identified as “learning about treatments and their consequences (sense-making work); engaging with others (participation work); adhering to treatments and lifestyle changes (enacting work, the most prominent theme); and monitoring treatments (appraisal work)” (Gallacher, May, Montori, & Mair, 2011, p. 238).
Ingham-Broomfield, R. (2015). A nurses’ guide to qualitative research. Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, 32(3), 34-40.
The purpose of this article is to avail a breakdown of the major components of qualitative research methodology to abridge the vocabulary and procedure of qualitative research to facilitate inexperienced readers to better comprehend the conceptions involved. A systematic and logical approach is employed not only to discuss the content of a typical qualitative study but also to demonstrate how qualitative research suits behavioral and social sciences because it assists in understanding the unique nature of human beings (Ingham-Broomfield, 2015). The study mentions that qualitative studies do not use hypotheses; rather they may state an observational question to be explored and pass it as a single statement or question (Ingham-Broomfield, 2015).
Cope, D.G. (2014). Methods and meanings: Credibility and trustworthiness of qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(1), 89-91.
This study discusses the most common criteria employed by researchers to assess qualitative research, namely credibility, dependability, authenticity, confirmability, and transferability. Credibility refers to the truth of the data or the participant perspectives and the interpretation and representation of them by the researcher, while confirmability denotes the researcher’s capability to demonstrate that the data represent the participant’s responses and not the researcher’s biases or perspectives (Cope, 2014). Transferability refers to findings that can be applied across settings or groups in any research endeavor, while authenticity denotes the capability and level to which the researcher articulates the feelings and emotions of the participant’s experiences in a research process in a faithful and trustworthy manner. Secondary criteria avail supplementary yardsticks of validity that are not relevant to every study and include explicitness, vividness, creativity, thoroughness, as well as a congruence (Cope, 2014). Credibility and trustworthiness in qualitative research can be enhanced through triangulation, thorough data collection and fieldwork, reflexivity, maintenance of an audit trail, and member checking.
Donnelly, F., & Weichula, R. (2013). An example of qualitative comparative analysis in nursing research. Nurse Researcher, 20(6), 6-11.
The major aim of this study is to illuminate an example of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) about the function of clinical placement (considered as a fundamental component of nursing education and an invaluable method to prepare nursing students for the reality of nursing), nursing education (any type of education provided to nursing students) and patient outcomes (outcomes for treatment procedures and processes). The paper, according to available literature, avails an exemplar of how QCA was employed “to consider whether there is a causal relationship between certain features of clinical placement, such as duration, level of preparation, level of benefit, and the capacity of recently graduated registered nurses to provide a range of nursing interventions for pneumonia, falls and pressure-area care” (Donnelly & Weichula, 2013, p. 6).
Article Critique
This section critiques the article titled “Understanding Patients’ Experiences of Treatment Burden in Chronic Heart Failure using Normalization Process Theory.” The problem is clearly stated using a few sentences. The problem is the increasing treatment burden, which “has the potential to induce nonadherence, wasted resources, and poor outcomes, especially in those with complex comorbidities” (Gallacher et al., 2011, p. 236). This problem is significant because it has a bearing on nursing or healthcare.
The purpose of the study is clearly stated as a clear statement of the aims of the research. Indeed, because qualitative research is not guided by a set of hypotheses (Ingham-Broomfield, 2015), the researchers of this study make every effort to state the intended aim(s) of the research as well as identify all the questions that the research seeks to address (Polit & Beck, 2012).
The research aims are stated broadly enough for a qualitative study, implying that the aims are set in such a manner that they will have the capacity to view reality as a subjective and multifaceted experience (Ingham-Broomfield, 2015). The study design is consistent with the qualitative approach, particularly in terms of carrying out qualitative analysis on archived interviews. The questions contained in the interviews demonstrate a bias with qualitative (non-numerical) data, hence the consistency (Donnelly & Weichula, 2013).
Although data for the study has been reanalyzed, the initial subjects were obtained through purposive sampling. This type of sampling is consistent with the qualitative approach as subjects are sampled by their knowledge and/or experience of the phenomenon under study (Donnelly & Weichula, 2013; Polit & Beck, 2012). The setting is appropriate for the study since previous data had been collected through interviews. Data collected through interviews are consistent with the purpose of the qualitative approach since they can produce data that are rich in context and scope (Polit & Beck, 2012).
The rights of human subjects are protected, as participants were made to sign written informed consent forms. No evidence of data saturation has been provided as the study is relying on previously recorded interviews, implying that it is not feasible for the researchers to collect data to a point where they are no longer hearing on seeing new information (Cope, 2014). Data is analyzed following the Normalization Process Theory (NPT) constructs, implying that data analysis is appropriate for the interview data collected as well as the qualitative method.
There is implicit evidence of scientific rigor, particularly in terms of transferability of the study results across settings, the authenticity of data collection techniques, the credibility of study findings, as well as conformability of findings. Credibility and trustworthiness in this study have been enhanced through triangulation, thorough data collection and fieldwork, and reflexivity (Cope, 2014). The conclusions and implications for practice are not appropriate and clearly stated since they are brief and do not reflect the contents of the whole paper. Suggestions for future research are also missing, implying that the research does not assume a progressive predisposition.
References
Cope, D.G. (2014). Methods and meanings: Credibility and trustworthiness of qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(1), 89-91.
Donnelly, F., & Weichula, R. (2013). An example of qualitative comparative analysis in nursing research. Nurse Researcher, 20(6), 6-11.
Gallacher, K., May, C.R., Montori, V.M., & Mair, F.S. (2011). Understanding patients’ experiences of treatment burden in chronic heart failure using normalization process theory. Annals of Family Medicine, 9(3), 235-243.
Ingham-Broomfield, R. (2015). A nurses’ guide to qualitative research. Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, 32(3), 34-40.
Polit, D.F., & Beck, C.T. (2012). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (9th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.