Critique of Research Studies:Protection of Human Rights

Research Studies Critique- Part Two
Name
Institution
Research Studies Critique- Part Two
Quantitative Research Critique
Method
Protection of Human Rights
According to Moule, Aveyard, and Goodman (2017), a research study involving human beings as research subjects should account for ethical considerations and protect the subjects from any harm. The study by Gill et. al. (2016) on fall prevention was reviewed and approved by institutional review boards from eight centers where the study was conducted. Further, participants’ safety was ensured through physical exams and medical history of the patients. As indicated by Polit and Beck (2016), ensuring ethical consideration and informing the participants of the possible risks and benefit is an important aspect of quantitative studies. The study by Gill et. al. (2016) obtained consent from the participants in a written form. As such, the participants were made aware of the possible benefits and harm they could receive from the study. However, it is not clear what measures the study put in place to ensure benefits were maximized and risks were minimized.
Research Design
The study by Gill et. al. (2016) adopted an experimental research design because the participants were randomly assigned to a health education program or physical activity program. Further the study utilized blinding to maximize the results’ validity. According to Polit and Beck (2016), blinding is effective in minimizing threats to external validity and biases in quantitative studies. Further, the use f randomization also minimized selection and allocation bias in the study. This is in line with Moule, Aveyard, and Goodman (2017), who indicate that a good research design should offer unbiased and accurate evidence. In addition, since the purpose of the study was to test whether the physical exercise program is more effective than health education program in reducing falls and fall-related injuries, the randomized clinical trial was rigorous enough as it allows comparison between two treatments. This makes it possible to determine the effectiveness of each treatment and decide which one is better. The design also allowed the researchers to answer the study’s research questions by addressing the objective of the study. According to Polit and Beck (2016), a good design should allow for comparison to ensure correct interpretation of the results, and the randomized clinical trial in the study by Gill et. al. (2016) allowed for comparison and causal inferences.
Population and Sample
According to Vance et.al. (2013), the sample selected for a study should be sufficient enough for generalization to the population. The study selected a sample of 1635 older people aged between 70 and 89 years, who were recruited via mass mails that were sent to the community. This sample was adequate and results could be generalized for the entire population of older people. Further, the sample selected was adequately described, an important aspect as opined by Polit and Beck (2016). The selected sample constituted of elderly who were between 70 and 89 years who did not have any major cognitive impairment, could walk for 400metres and had functional limitations. Further, the study adopted a stratified ...