Evaluating information is an important part of the research process. Whilst searching for information you will gather a large amount of materials from many different sources. It is particularly useful when your search retrieves lots of different articles and is a good way of distinguishing which are more relevant to your research question. It is also a useful way of assessing whether the information is at an appropriate level for academic work.
Here are some useful articles to help you with evaluating research.
The Centre for Evidence Based Medicine at the University of Oxford have written an introduction to critical appraisal
Many health research articles are written following the IMRAD structure. IMRAD is an acronym for Introduction Method Research Discussion (Mathieson and Upton, 2008). According to Crombie (1996), questions to consider when appraising/ critiquing articles are:
Introduction: why was the study undertaken? What was the research question or the purpose of the research? The aims of the research should be clearly identifiable and the introduction should ideally contain evidence of a literature review along with keywords used to find information.
Method: Greenhalgh (2010) argues that researchers should use this section and the quality of the methodology to decide whether the evidence is good enough to put into practice or use at an academic level on the strength is the section. Questions such as when, where and how was the study done. Who or which patient groups were included in the research? Was a pilot study conducted beforehand to identify potential problems? Details of the structure of questionnaires should be included along with any tests for validity and reliability (Crombie, 1996). The idea behind the methods section is that any researcher can replicate the study elsewhere.
Also consider:
Sample size: this will affect how reliable and valid the research is. Is the sample big enough? How has it been selected and has the researcher attempted to control any issues which may affect the validity and reliability of the research? Is there any evidence of bias e.g. sponsorship? Has the sample population been randomised?
Response rate: what proportion of the sample responded?
Setting: do the socioeconomic conditions of a particular geographical area mean that the research is not transferable to other areas? Can the results be generalised to the wider population?
Results: what are the results and do they answer the original research question? Have the results been analysed by more than one person? Are the results clearly presented?
Discussion: what are the implications for the research and is it applicable to your practice and day to day working role? The researcher should also include a discussion about how their research could be improved and any limitations of the research.
References
Crombie, I.K. (1996). The pocket guide to critical appraisal: a handbook for health care professionals. London: BMJ.
Greenhalgh, T. (2010). How to read a paper; the basics of evidence based medicine (4th ed.) London: BMJ.
Mathieson, I. and Upton, D. (2008). A podiatrist's guide to using research. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone Elsevier.
Health Knowledge: provides a list of useful questions to consider when critiquing a piece of research.
CASP: this is a popular framework for critical appraisal presenting a series of questions to consider depending upon the study type.
BestBets: you can search BestBets for pre-appraised journal articles and real life researchable questions.
Centre for evidence based medicine : a good introduction to critical appraisal
NHS Choices highlights recent stories in the news and evaluates the research behind the headlines.
