The Quantitative Article Caregiving For Patients With Heart Failure

1410 Words 6 Pages
Introduction. Quantitative research is research in which numbers are used to represent reality, and it is directed with the purpose of discovering relationships as well as cause and effect (Fain, 2015). For the purpose of this critique the reader will be analyzing the effectiveness of the Quantitative Article Caregiving for Patients with Heart Failure: Impact on Patients’ Families. To complete this critique, the reader is using methods outlined in the text Reading, Understanding, and Applying Nursing Research.
This study clearly stated its purpose, which was, “to identify factors associated with the impact of caregiving –both positive and negative—among family caregivers of patients with heart failure” (Hwang, Fleischmann, Howie-Esquivel,
…show more content…
These measurements were appropriate for the research design indicated in the article. They incorporated concepts that would directly affect the impact caring for a patient with heart failure would have on the caregiver which was the purpose of the research. The measurements allow for variabilities within the sample …show more content…
The results were presented in a very concise and comprehensive manner. The statistical procedure used in this study was the SPSS 15.0 software which enabled the researchers to conduct statistical analysis of the data retrieved from their measures. The researchers went on to describe their results through statistical analysis. They described their response rate and differences in results depending on if the patients became hospitalized during the study period or became ineligible. There were three tables describing the research findings Table 1 (Characteristics of patients with heart failure and their caregivers), Table 2 (Descriptive statistics for measures), and Table 3 (Multiple Regression analyses for impact of caregiving). Of these tables Table 1was clear but not complete. While describing the sample characteristics information on the patients were described in full detail however Table 1 failed to incorporate all of these findings, choosing to express partial information such as only the female sex character risk and only the White race/ethnicity. This information would be valid in the table because as it is now the interpretation is that the patients are either white or not, when in the sample characteristic explanation, they reveal that 11% of the patients were Hispanic, 11% African American, and 9% Asian/Pacific Islander. Table 2 was clear and complete and the table reflected the findings accurately. Table 3 stated all variables related to the impact very

Related Documents