An article critique provides essential information about the quality of investigation for use in further research and practice. A reviewer considers vital sections of the article to ensure that they include pertinent information, such as the purpose, theoretical framework, variables/hypothesis/research questions, methodology, data analysis, and conclusions with implications. The article under review in the current project is “Management of Community-acquired Pneumonia in Adults.” The review is necessary to establish whether the work is a reliable and valid source of data for research and practice relating to the topic.
Quality research should identify the purpose of the study drawing from the statement of the problem. It guides the objective for conducting the data collection and analysis to come to logical conclusions. Waterer, Rello, and Wunderink (2011) provided a clear statement of the problem, the lack of improvement in addressing the problem of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in the United States. The disease is still a major cause of severe sepsis and the main cause of mortality from infections. The researchers place the statement within the context of previous research on the topic and gaps, such as the lack of change in mortality rates in the country. The proposed study will solve the problem which is relevant to nursing. The purpose of the study is to discuss the various developments in the knowledge of the pathophysiology of severe community-acquired pneumonia and the current interventions that are used in the management of the common condition. The study includes the various limitations in the knowledge and the main priorities for further exploration of the topic.
Review of Literature
Review of past knowledge on the topic is vital when conducting research. It helps the researcher to find out what has been done by others in the field and the gaps that can be filled through the current collection and analysis of data. Researchers should consult quality sources to inform their analysis and conclusions. Waterer, Rello, and Wunderink (2011) reviewed research on the Clinical Scoring Tools that doctors have used in the past to establish community-acquired pneumonia in patients and the level of risk of negative results. Some of the tools include “the Pneumonia Severity Index, CURB-65, CRB-65, American Thoracic Society major and minor criteria, CURXO, SMART-COP, and CAP-PIRO” (p. 157). They further reviewed research on the effect and comparison of the different tools to establish reliable ones. Considering that the article was published in 2011, the majority of the reviewed studies were within the past ten years. Hence, it can be concluded that the researchers reviewed recent and relevant scholarly articles.
Studies are based on a theoretical framework that guides the data collection and analysis process. Some researchers indicate the theory they use in their research, which is the hypothetical basis for the collection and analysis of the current data. Waterer, Rello, and Wunderink (2011) did not clearly define theoretical concepts relating to their research. Besides, they have not indicated the theoretical framework that was relevant to their study. The theory that would be useful in the study is William’s theory of caregiving dynamics. It relates to the role of the caregiver in helping patients to overcome medical challenges. It also focuses on various medical conditions and changes in the caregiving relationship between the physician and the patient to improve health outcomes. The research recognizes major gaps in providing management for community-acquired pneumonia and the need for effective interventions. The study seeks to identify new alternatives in offering support to people diagnosed with community-acquired pneumonia and the need to identify risk factors for adverse outcomes.
Studies identify the important variables that are tested through data collection and analysis. They are either dependent or independent and are defined in quality studies. The dependent variable in the study is the management of community-acquired pneumonia. The independent variable in the study is the Clinical Scoring Tools. The tools are useful in establishing the potential for community-acquired pneumonia and effective management to prevent negative outcomes. The hypothesis of the study is not indicated in the article, probably because the study did not involve the collection of primary data. The researchers did not provide any research questions to guide the study. Besides, the study does not involve any clear assumptions.
The methodology is one of the most critical parts of a research study. It is the actual implementation because it involves the process used to collect data to answer a research question or test a hypothesis. Waterer, Rello, and Wunderink (2011) conducted a quantitative review of previous studies on the Clinical Scoring Tools that are used in the testing and management of community-acquired pneumonia. However, the study was based on a systematic review of research on the topic. The study used inductive reasoning because it started with a conclusion or broad generalization from particular observations. For example, the researchers established the reality of high rates of and related deaths resulting from community-acquired pneumonia and the need for effective management. The study did not include sample size, population, sampling method, and setting because it was not a primary study, which involves the collection of data from subjects. The researcher did not use any sampling method. The reliability and validity of the measurement tools emerged from the fact that they were used in previous research. Ethical considerations were not indicated because no human subjects were involved in the study.
Researchers collect and analyze data from a sample to draw findings and conclusions. They use data analysis tools depending on the research design. The process is useful to answer a research question or test hypothesis. However, this is only possible through primary research. The current study did not assume a primary approach, and hence, no collection of data from human subjects took place. Therefore, the current study involved a review of previous data in presenting results. Waterer, Rello, and Wunderink (2011) systematically presented their findings from the analysis in different sections, such as “Determining Patients at Risk of Adverse Acute Outcomes, Optimal Antibiotic Therapy in Severe Community-Acquired Pneumonia; and Long-Term Consequences of Community-Acquired Pneumonia among various sub-sections (p. 160-1621).” The study revealed the effectiveness of biomarkers in the assessment of bacterial load in the diagnosis and treatment of community-acquired pneumonia. The researchers indicated the tools that can be used to offer effective intervention and management of the disease to reduce the negative outcomes such as high mortality rates.
Summary/Conclusions, Implications, and Recommendations
Researchers come to some logical conclusions following the collection and analysis of data relating to the topic. The study revealed high rates of community-acquired pneumonia and mortality regardless of major advances in treatment. The researchers sought to establish effective tools for assessment to inform the proper management of the condition. They established the potential for biomarkers and predominantly molecular evaluation of bacterial load in the diagnosis and adequate control of the illness. The information is essential to guide therapeutic procedures. The results of the study can be generalized in other settings to inform the management of community-acquired pneumonia. Other physicians can use the findings in their therapeutic settings for the assessment and treatment of the condition. The tools are standardized for all aspects where the management of the disease takes place. The potential for effective tools in the assessment and management of community-acquired pneumonia has major implications in nursing. The study provides insight into the reliable tools that can be useful in the testing of the disease in clinical settings and guide effective treatment. They also change the current approach to the treatment of the condition because the current strategies have been ineffective. They indicate the main unresolved issues as grounds for future research on the topic.
As it is evident from the analysis, research article critique plays an essential role in nursing because it informs the quality of evidence presented. The reviewer looks at the various parts of the scholarly article to determine the inclusiveness of all necessary information that guides further research and practice. The current review provides vital data for the assessment and management of community-acquired pneumonia. Although the study is not primary and does not involve the collection of data from human subjects, it provides vital information that can be used in future research to inform clinical practice. It is a quality source of evidence on the problem of community-acquired pneumonia in current health care settings.