Article Critique
Introduction
?
What was the purpose of the study?
To address the gap of studies that do not exist that focus on examining the impact of
exercise programs already existing in the community. The purpose of the study was very
basic and mentioned quite early in the article.
?
List any objectives, questions or hypotheses.
The hypothesis was that the outcomes of treatment participants would improve
significantly relative to the outcomes of the control group. This is a very broad
hypothesis and could have focused on specific outcomes rather than all outcomes, which
we assume they are talking about, however a broad hypothesis is acceptable since this is
the first study looking at programs already in existence – they might not know what to
expect or what to focus on.
?
What are the independent and dependent variables contained within the study?
Because the hypothesis is so broad, they are not identifying one single dependent variable
that is the primary outcome. It is evident as you read through the methods that there are
several main and intermediate outcomes that are being measured that could be identified
as independent variables. Based on the hypothesis I would suggest the dependent
variable is participation in the existing exercise program and the independent variables
are all of the measurable outcomes.
?
Does the hypothesis or research question flow logically from the framework of the
article?
Yes – it is mentioned very early in the study and the article flowed well with it. The only
suggestion would be that the hypothesis be more specific as to what is expected to
improve, with further discussion on why. This would help eliminate the multiple
comparison problem – finding something to be significant by chance alone since so many
outcomes are being measured.
Lit Review and Ethics
?
Does the content of the literature review relate directly to the research problem?
At first glance, yes all of the cited sources appear to apply and relate directly to the
problem at hand. Several other studies were referred to at the beginning of the article.
?
Was the study approved by the appropriate IRB or similar ethics review committee?
It was not discussed being approved by Institutional Review Board so it would have been
nice to have noted.
?
Did the study identify the risks/benefits of the study?
Once could assume that the risks and benefits of an exercise program are understood
based on the natural cognitive ability of a typical participant, but we do not want to leave
the reader of research to assume anything.
?
If the study did not provide the risks/benefits, what might they be?
Risks could include risks associated with physical activity, especially since most
participants have not been a part of such activity in a long time, including broken bones,
strained muscles, fatigue, and other factors. Benefits could include a more healthy
lifestyle, alleviated symptoms of many other factors, overall improvement of physical
and mental health, and other factors.
?
Were appropriate informed consent procedures used with all participants?
The participants did sign a form indicating their informed consent and their physicians
gave consent to participants’ participation.
Research Design
?
Is the research design appropriate for the problem being studied?
Because this is the first of its type of study there is not a clear basis to determine if the
design is completely inappropriate. The study did do an excellent job to outline its
processes and data collection procedures and its process for controlling for missing data
with participants.
?
How were confounding variables controlled?
The inclusion and exclusion criteria assisting with testing those that truly are not already
participating in physical activity programs rather than all participants which could
include already physically active individuals – preventing the questions they want to
answer from being answered.
?