16 May 2023 13:47 PM | UPDATED 7 months ago




Instructions (delete all purple text prior to submitting):

This assignment requires you to critically appraise two studies.

Download this template, leave the sub-headings, and delete the purple text prior to submission.

Ensure your student name and ID is included.

The assignment should be supported by a minimum of 8 references; however, you are encouraged to use more if needed to support your discussion. References should be valid academic sources.

Your appraisal should have in-text references as per APA 7th referencing style. You do not need to reference the two studies that you are appraising – this has been done for you.

The word limit is 1200 words +/- 10%. This includes in-text citations but not the reference list or sub-headings.

Note that the section marked ‘consider’ are suggestions only, there is likely to be more detail that you should add.

Study A (approx. 600 words total)

Verkleij, S., Luijsterburg, P., Willemsen, S., Koes, B., Bohnen, A., & Bierma – Zeinstra, S. (2015). Effectiveness of diclofenac versus paracetamol in knee osteoarthritis: a randomised controlled trial in primary care. British Journal of General Practice, 65(637), E530–E537.

Study design valid for a Randomised Control Trial

Consider: Did the study address a clearly focussed research question or hypothesis, was PICO used to define the question, was the assignment of participants randomised, were all participants that entered the study accounted for at its conclusion?

Methodologically sound

Consider: did ‘blinding’ occur, were the study groups similar at start of the study, could any differences affect the outcome, apart from the intervention did each study group receive the same standard of care, was there a clear study protocol, were follow up intervals the same for each group, is the sample and setting appropriate?

Data collection, instruments, analysis

Consider: What instruments were used to collect data, were they appropriate for the study, how was the data analysed?


Were the effects of the intervention reported comprehensively?


Consider: What is your conclusion about the paper? Would you use it to change your practice or to recommend changes to care? Strengths and limitations?

Study B (approx. 600 words total)

Bak, M. A. R., Hoyle, L. P., Mahoney, C., & Kyle, R. G. (2020). Strategies to promote nurses’ health: A qualitative study with student nurses. Nurse Education in Practice, 48, 102860.

Problem the study was designed to solve

Consider: Is there a clear statement of the aim, why was it thought important to conduct this study?

Qualitative methodology appropriateness

Consider: what type of study design was used, was it appropriate to answer the research question, did the authors justify the research design?

Recruitment and sample

Consider: how were participants selected, were the sample’s characteristics appropriate based on the design and setting of the study?

Data collection

Consider: Was the setting for collection justified, is it clear how it was collected, were tools or instrument used, were they appropriate based on study design, is the form of the data clear (e.g., recordings, video etc)?

Data analysis rigor

Consider: is an in-depth description of the analysis process given; is sufficient data presented to support findings; are contradictory data considered; has the researcher examined their own role, potential bias, and influence during analysis and collection of data?


Consider: What is your conclusion about the paper? Would you use it to change your practice or to recommend changes to care? Strengths and limitations?


Also visit: