Skip to Main Content

Course & Subject Guides

HHD 1007: Methods of Evidence-Based Practice

This guide is designed to support students in HHD 1007.

Critically Reading an Article

You will be reading at a lot of articles, books, book chapters and reports.  Some have language can seem opaque and difficult to read or include confusing charts and graphs. It’s useful to approach reading this type of literature in a systematic way, asking yourself evaluative questions as you read.  This process of reading can help you analyze the content and determine how it fits into your research.

  1. Read the abstract, and the conclusions first. The abstract should summarize the key points of the study.  Pay attention to the population studied and the size of the population sample.  Reviewing the abstract and conclusion should give you a sense of whether the article is related to your topic and if you want to read the entire work more closely.
  2. Read the entire article with attention to details.  Read the article carefully, paying attention to specific details and how they tell the story of the research.  Use the questions below to help you identify how and why the research was carried out. Critically assess the research and conclusions drawn in the article.  Remember that simply disagreeing with the material is not considered to be a critical assessment of the material.  For example, stating that the sample size is insufficient is not a critical assessment.  Describing why the sample size is insufficient for the claims being made in the study would be a critical assessment.

Consider the following questions as you read sections of the article:

Overall Article

  • What kind of article is it (e.g., research study, review article, meta-analysis, etc.)?
  • Who are the authors, and what is their background?
  • Why did the authors do this research?

Introduction

  • What was the research question or hypothesis?
  • Was there any mention of previous studies on this topic (literature review)?
  • Why was this study performed (the rationale)?
  • What were the aims and objectives of the study?

Methods

  • How did the researcher attempt to answer the research question?
  • What methods were used (e.g., systematic recording of observations, analysis and evaluation of published research, assessment of theory, qualitative interviews or focus groups, etc.), and why were those methods used?
  • Check the methods for flaws. What is the population of the study? Is the sample selection and size adequate? Is the experimental design sound?
  • Was there mention of any ethical considerations?
  • What were the inclusion criteria? What were the exclusion criteria?
  • What equipment/instruments were used for data collection?
  • What statistical methods/tests were employed? Were they appropriate for evaluation?

Results

  • What were the results of the study? Key findings?
  • What statistical tests were used to evaluate the significance of the conclusions based on numeric or graphic data?
  • Were the results reliable? Were the results valid?
  • Which results were statistically significant?
  • Carefully examine the data presented in the tables and diagrams. Were the tables/graphs easy to comprehend?
  • Review the results as presented in the text while referring to the data in the tables and diagrams. Does the text complement and explain the data? Are there discrepancies between the results in the text and those in the tables?

Discussion

  • Were the authors able to answer the research question (test the hypothesis) raised?
  • How were the results interpreted? How were they related to the original problem (authors’ view of evidence rather than objective findings)?
  • Was the analysis of the data relevant to the research question?
  • What were the strengths of the study? What were the limitations of the study?
  • Were there any extrapolations of the findings beyond the range of data?
  • What is the significance of the research? Do the authors mention wider implications of the findings?
  • Did the reported observations or interpretations support or refute observations or interpretations made by other researchers?
  • Does the interpretation arise logically from the data or is it too far-fetched?
  • Have the faults, flaws, or shortcomings of the research been addressed?
  • Is there a section on recommendations for future research? Are there other research possibilities or directions suggested?

Consider the article as a whole

After you have evaluated the research, consider whether the research has been successful. Has it led to new questions being asked, or new ways of using existing knowledge? Are other researchers citing this paper?  Consider the following questions:

  • Reread the abstract. Does it accurately summarize the article?
  • Have other researchers subsequently supported or refuted the observations or interpretations of these authors?
  • Did the research make a significant contribution to human knowledge?
  • Did the research produce any practical applications?
  • What are the social, political, technological, medical implications of this research?

 

This content adapted from the following sources: