Critical appraisal

IF 6.4 2区 心理学 Q1 HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology Pub Date : 2021-07-12 DOI:10.1080/1750984X.2021.1952471
David Tod, Andrew Booth, Brett Smith
{"title":"Critical appraisal","authors":"David Tod, Andrew Booth, Brett Smith","doi":"10.1080/1750984X.2021.1952471","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The purpose of the current article is to define critical appraisal, identify its benefits, discuss conceptual issues influencing the adequacy of a critical appraisal, and detail procedures to help reviewers undertake critical appraisals. A critical appraisal involves a careful and systematic assessment of a study’s trustworthiness or methodological rigour, and contributes to assessing how confident people can be in the findings of a set of studies. To help reviewers include high quality critical appraisals in their articles, they can consider differences between quality and bias, the value of total quality scores, the advantages and disadvantages of standardized checklists, the relevance of the experimental hierarchy of evidence, the differences between critical appraisal tools and reporting standards, and the challenges involved in appraising qualitative research. The steps involved in a sound critical appraisal include: (a) identifying the study type(s) of the individual paper(s), (b) identifying appropriate criteria and checklist(s), (c) selecting an appropriate set of criteria and checklist, (d) performing the appraisal, and (e) summarizing and using the results. Although these steps apply to critical appraisals of both quantitative and qualitative research, they require reviewers to make and defend a number of decisions resulting from the subjective features involved in assessing research.","PeriodicalId":47658,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1750984X.2021.1952471","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2021.1952471","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

ABSTRACT The purpose of the current article is to define critical appraisal, identify its benefits, discuss conceptual issues influencing the adequacy of a critical appraisal, and detail procedures to help reviewers undertake critical appraisals. A critical appraisal involves a careful and systematic assessment of a study’s trustworthiness or methodological rigour, and contributes to assessing how confident people can be in the findings of a set of studies. To help reviewers include high quality critical appraisals in their articles, they can consider differences between quality and bias, the value of total quality scores, the advantages and disadvantages of standardized checklists, the relevance of the experimental hierarchy of evidence, the differences between critical appraisal tools and reporting standards, and the challenges involved in appraising qualitative research. The steps involved in a sound critical appraisal include: (a) identifying the study type(s) of the individual paper(s), (b) identifying appropriate criteria and checklist(s), (c) selecting an appropriate set of criteria and checklist, (d) performing the appraisal, and (e) summarizing and using the results. Although these steps apply to critical appraisals of both quantitative and qualitative research, they require reviewers to make and defend a number of decisions resulting from the subjective features involved in assessing research.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
严格评价
本文的目的是定义批判性评估,确定其益处,讨论影响批判性评估充分性的概念性问题,并详细说明帮助审稿人进行批判性评估的程序。批判性评估包括对一项研究的可信度或方法的严谨性进行仔细而系统的评估,并有助于评估人们对一系列研究结果的信心。为了帮助审稿人在他们的文章中纳入高质量的批判性评价,他们可以考虑质量和偏倚之间的差异、总质量分数的价值、标准化检查表的优缺点、实验证据层次的相关性、批判性评价工具和报告标准之间的差异,以及评价定性研究所涉及的挑战。健全的批判性评估所涉及的步骤包括:(a)确定个别论文的研究类型,(b)确定适当的标准和清单,(c)选择一套适当的标准和清单,(d)进行评估,以及(e)总结和使用结果。尽管这些步骤适用于定量和定性研究的关键评估,但它们要求审稿人根据评估研究中涉及的主观特征做出一些决定并为之辩护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
17.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology is the first scholarly, peer-reviewed journal that publishes critical reviews of research literature in sport and exercise psychology. Typically, these reviews evaluate relevant conceptual and methodological issues in the field and provide a critique of the strengths and weaknesses of empirical studies that address common themes or hypotheses. The reviews present summaries of, and conclusions about, the current state of knowledge concerning topics of interest, as well as assessments of relevant unresolved issues and future trends. Reviews of research literature on theories, topics and issues that are at the interface with mainstream psychology are especially welcome.
期刊最新文献
The role of deliberation in intuitive decision-making in sports The coach-athlete relationship within a cross-boundary team of experts: a conceptual analysis Scoping review of literature and systematic search of web-based resources: parasport classification instructions, experiences, and outcomes Performance support team effectiveness in elite sport: a narrative review Application of Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) in assessing the relationship between affect and movement behaviors among people with mood disorders: a scoping review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1