Article

Toneti, A.N., Freitas, D., Maganbosco, P., Toneti, B.F., Lana, D.M., Godoy, S., &Marchi-Alves, L. (2016).  Use of noninvasive procedures in the cardiovascular risk assessment of hypertensive and normotensive individuals.  Journal of Vascular Nursing, 34(1), 17-23.  doi: 10.1016/j.jvn.2015.10.001

Does the title identify:

i)      The type of people to whom the research is being applied?  Who are they?

Patients from Brazil above the age of 18 years took part in the study. Exclusion criteria applied in the program was patients below 18 years of age, “pregnancy and puerperal period”, or have “preliminary diagnosis of counterindication for BP measured on ankles, diabetes mellitus, patients with cardiac arrhythmia, patient using anticoagulation and antiplatelet aggregation drugs”.

ii)    The paradigm/ methodology?

Quantitative, cross-sectional and descriptive approach was used in this study.

iii)  The main finding(s) of the study?

“Cardiovascular risk predictors depict more frequent alterations among hypertensive than normotensive individuals”.

Can you identify the authors’:

i)      Qualifications? Yes/No for all authors?

Yes

ii)    Professional background? Yes/No for all authors?

No

iii)  Current job? Yes/No for all authors?

No

iv)  Previous similar research? Yes/No for all authors?

Yes

v)    Conflicts of interest? Yes/No for all authors?

No

Research question:

i)      Do the introduction and background identify the need for the study? What is it?

Yes

Determination of non-invasive procedures for “cardiovascular risk assessment of hypertensive and normotensive individuals”

ii)    Can you identify the purpose of the research (aim, objective, question or hypothesis)?  What are they?

Yes

“To identify the cardiovascular risk of hypertensive and normotensive individuals through the use of different non-invasive procedures to assess the vascular function and integrity: ankle-brachial index, pulse pressure, and delta brachial-brachial and delta ankle-brachial indexes”.

Have the researchers:

i)      Demonstrated the research is necessary?  (Unnecessary research is not ethical). How did they demonstrate?

Necessary research demonstrated

Ethical standards of international standards undertaken

Declaration of ethics and necessity undertaken in the study.

ii)     Gained ethics approval?

Yes

iii)   Demonstrated concern for confidentiality and anonymity?  How?

Yes

Declaration from participants

iv)   Demonstrated informed consent processes (freedom from coercion, right to withdraw, extra concern for vulnerable participants)?  How?

Yes

Declaration from participants

v)     Shown concern for ethics principles (autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, justice).  How?

Yes

Declaration from participants

Methodology and methods:

i)      Are the paradigm (quantitative or qualitative) and methodology identified?  What are they?

Quantitative methodology identified

Quantitative methodology of frequency distribution, statistical mean analysis and distribution analysis with correlation coefficient and Pearson’s coefficient is undertaken.

ii)     Do the research paradigm and selected methodology seem appropriate for the study?  Why?  (200 words).  Support your rationale with scholarly literature.

Research paradigm and methodology is appropriate for study.

The research paradigm and selected methodology is seen appropriate as the aim of the study was to ascertain arterial hypertension with its association of high prevalence of vascular alterations. Correlation coefficient is used to study the relationship amongst the variables that are being studied. In the current analysis by analysing the coefficient between the frequencies of data of the population, it has been possible to arrive at the conclusion related to the study. By analysis of distribution and correlation analysis the findings of this study could easily be ascertained (Queirós et al, 2017). Such data analysis has been conducted by use of SPPS tool, which accurately determines the results of the study. With this methodology the statistical significance for the procedure being analysed has been diagnosed. With such statistical significance being determined in this study the risk assessment of hypertensive and normotensive individuals can also be determined. 

iii)   Can you identify the data collection method?  What is it?  Is this method appropriate for this study?  (200 words).  Support your discussion with scholarly literature.

The data collection method in the study can be identified clearly. The data have been collected by way of conducting interview with the targeted population. The researcher also measured the various performance metrics related to the participants in the study (Salazar et al, 2015). 

The method can be deemed as appropriate as the data collected is sufficient to arrive at the results to be ascertained in the study procedure.

With ascertaining of data collection methods and procedures the researchers were able to arrive at the findings related to the study and also arrive at results. The data analysis has been conducted by use of SPPS tool, which accurately determines the results of the study. With this methodology the statistical significance for the procedure being analysed has been diagnosed. With such statistical significance being determined in this study the risk assessment of hypertensive and normotensive individuals can also be determined.  Moreover, the researcher could establish connectedness with the objectives of the study, hence the method can be deemed to be suitable in this study procedure.

iv)   Is the method of analysis appropriate for this study?  (200 words).  Support your discussion with scholarly literature.

The method of analysis is also suitable for this study procedure. As statistical techniques using SPSS mean, variance, frequency distribution, correlation coefficient has been determined (Salazar et al, 2015). The method accurately determines the results of the study. With this methodology the statistical significance for the procedure being analysed has been diagnosed. With such statistical significance being determined in this study the risk assessment of hypertensive and normotensive individuals can also be determined.  This analysis technique has been able to identify the results the study aimed at ascertaining hence it was adopted for this study.

Sampling:

i)      Was the method of recruiting identified?  What was it?

The method of recruiting identified population was not adequately laid down in the article.

Only a brief outline of the participants was given in this study.

ii)     Was the sample the right size?  Why?

The sample size was not adequate.

The sample size was very small comprising of 123 individuals, hence the sample size selected should have been greater and better distributed to find relevant of the study.

iii)   Do the authors identify why that size was selected?  How?

The author does identify the size and its selection procedure was not clearly indicated in the study. Though some criteria for sample recruitment have been indicated.

iv)   Are demographics of the participants described adequately?  Why do you believe this to be the case?

The demographics of the participant population were described by determining the exclusion criteria.

However, the description of the participants was not adequately laid down. Participant description cannot be identified by determination of exclusion criteria hence I feel this is the case.

v)     Does the sample seem to be appropriate to meet the study purpose?  Why?

The sample though might be appropriate but not adequate in meeting the purpose of this study.

The participant selected for the scope of the study is less as compared against the scope determined in this study procedure.

Findings/results:

i)      Do the results address what the researchers identified in the research question?  Why do you believe this to be the case?

The results adequately identify the identified research questions.

I believe this is the case as every paragraph of the results adequately reflects the connectedness to the initially identified objectives in the study. Further the table given in the results adequately identifies the objectives as identified in the study. 

Does the discussion:

i)      Reflect the results?

The discussion adequately identifies the results.

ii)     Reflect the purpose of the research?

The discussion does relate to the purpose of the research.

iii)   Identify any obstacles?

The discussion does not identify any sort of obstacles however identifies the risk factors of the study.

iv)   Compare the results with existing literature?

The discussion does compare the results with some existing literatures.

Does the conclusion:

i)      Reflect the results and discussion?

The conclusion does not separately identify results and discussion. 

ii)    Identify implications?

There is a separate area identifying clinical implications. Clinical implications of this research includeenhancement of nursing practices and in diagnosis as well as treatment in preventing arterial complications.

iii) Identify possibilities for future research?

The article does not identify areas of future research.

However, there remain tremendous opportunities for future research due to the limitedness of areas identified in this research.

Overall quality:  How highly do you rate this article?  (Low, moderate or high).  Is it a quality article that you could use to support your own scholarly work?

The quality of the article is moderate. Though the clinical implication of the article can lead to enhancement of nursing practice, diagnosis and treatment. 

The article has low citation score and the metrics of the article were also not clearly available. Also, as the article’s outcome has limited application as it was performed on specific population set and considering single procedure only. Due to the limitation factors used in the study, the overall implication of this study is itself limited. However there remain tremendous opportunities to expand on the scope of work undertaken in this study, which can enhance the quality of the article further.