In the following paragraphs I will provide a critique of the quantitative article entitled Nurses' perception of the geriatric nurse practice environment hospitals (Boltz, 2008). The details below will be based on the criteria presented to us for review in the Step-by-Step Guide to Critical Research – Part 1: Quantitative Research (Coughlin, 2007). These guidelines provided me with the basis to properly critique this article in all aspects. The following components will be included in the critique; Title, hypothesis, research design, introduction, method, results and general overview of the entire article. Each part must be critiqued individually and then combined as a whole. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay When you review the title of the article Hospital Nurses' Perception of the Geriatric Nurse Practice Environment published in the 2008 Journal of Nursing Scholarship (Boltz, 2008 ), I believe this title clearly states the purpose of the information provided in the article and provide clear indications on what will be covered in the article. The title is clear and concise and would provide appropriate results for nurses searching for an article on this topic. I believe the author has appropriately met the standards of a well-written title in his article. The authors listed for this article have clearly provided information about their qualifications for the basis of writing this article and their ability to adequately gather the information required for this type of research article. While we have learned that the merits of the article cannot simply be assumed to be correct based on the author's credentials, we are able to use them to develop a sense of his or her expertise and how it relates to the topic shown. These authors appear to have the appropriate qualifications and experience necessary for this article to be accepted as accurate and worthy of use for research purposes. When reviewing the abstract provided by the authors for this article, I do not feel that it provides significant enough information to properly inform me of the content of the article and the path the article takes. The abstract once read does not provide enough meaning to determine whether this article can provide me with sufficient information and insights on the topic indicated by the title. With a few additional sentences I believe the author could drastically improve the abstract of the article and attract more nurses, readers, researchers to his article which could contain useful information for their research related to the environment of geriatric nurses in the hospital. the quantitative research article hypothesis is closely related to the abstract and can sometimes be interchangeable in some way when providing information to the researcher or reader, this article does not use a clear hypothesis, and due to the nature of the short, condensed abstract I don't think this category of criticism has been met or designed adequately in this article. With the abbreviated abstract I believe it is necessary to have a more in-depth hypothesis to provide the reader, researcher and nurse with additional information for quick and condensed reading to determine if this article can provide useful information for the intended use. The article hypothesis should provide a broad overview of what is included in the article and what can be gained from reading or using the article for research. One of the most vital partsof any type of article, but especially for a quantitative research article this is as it refers to the research design used to formulate and develop the article and affects how and by whom it can be used to gain knowledge about the subject matter research. Too often you find that authors do not fully think about how their article will be used and how this will impact the design and research method that would be most helpful in providing the end user with the information in the format they need. In this article the research and findings were compiled from responses submitted by direct care registered nurses in facilities that provide care to geriatric patients, however it does not specify whether these responses are from nurses who have actually provided care to geriatric patients or have been simply exposed to the environment in the facility. The research for this piece was also gleaned from secondary analysis of data collected by New York University's Hartford Institute. It is unclear, based on data provided in connection with this facility, whether New York University's Hartford Institute provides geriatric care or has geriatric nurses on staff at its facility. While I believe that the type of research collected is appropriate for this type of study and that direct responses can certainly provide insight into nurses' perceptions of the geriatric nurses' practice environment, I would be curious to hear about how many of these nurses have actually provided geriatric care or have simply been exposed to the environment as their assigned facility provides this type of care. I believe information about perceptions of geriatric care can vary greatly when coming from a nurse who actually provides this type of care versus those who have only been exposed to the geriatric nursing environment. The methodologies used in preparing the article appear to be based on thorough reading and the information provided supports the information contained in the article. However, reading the information regarding the methodologies used, I feel like it is a little confusing and might not be fully understood if someone was using this article without having direct contact with the type of geriatric environment being discussed. The methodologies used in the study appear to provide a wide range of typologies and should be adequate in providing research studies and quantifying accurate data in all aspects of geriatric nursing. The ethical element in relation to geriatric nursing care is also considered in this evaluation. the information provided in the research article and how collection practices were handled to provide an ethical balance between providing large amounts of information but maintaining the ethical requirement that no harm was done to patients or nurses during the collection of the required data and that all HIPPA requirements were met evaluated and analyzed the secondary data collected by the nurses on the geriatric environment. While it is clear that this article aims solely to provide nurses' perception of the geriatric nursing environment in a facility, it is necessary to realize that this type of information has or would have involved the care or observation of patients being cared for on the geriatric floor of the facility. structure. Based on the credentials of the authors and involved individuals who provided data for the completion of this article, I believe they would be quite experienced and familiar with the proceduresnecessary to ensure that all ethical components have been met. The article appears to use the non-experimental type of research that allows the information to be developed and provides for the possibility of further research and additional articles based on the provisional information that has been analyzed and segmented to provide the research in the article, could also be further evaluated and provided further research. This type of research also allows us to compare the relationship between nurses and how they perceive geriatric nursing care in their facilities. Their opinions, although not directly stated in the article, may involve them comparing their observations and opinions about the typical nursing environment and the similarities and differences between "normal" nursing and the "geriatric" nursing environment. Also noted in the article is information that clearly explains to users that not included in the data presented is the “measure of the influence of organizational support on patient outcomes” including satisfaction and clinical measures. While I realize that in research articles we cannot always provide research and information in all areas associated with the topic covered in this article, I believe that this type of feedback and research is crucial to providing the complete picture of people's perceptions. nurses the geriatric nursing environment. Also discussed is the fact that a bias may be presented in the article between facilities that they believe provide high-quality geriatric care versus those that may not have been perceived as providing the highest level of care for geriatric patients ( Boltz, 2007)? While we all, as humans, realize that these types of biases exist when we sample opinions, it is necessary to ensure that these types of issues are handled appropriately in our research and that we are able to consolidate the information provided in our research not to include these types of statistics. Overall the article provided a good insight into nurses' opinion in relation to the geriatric nursing environment. There were some questions based on the data presented and information provided by the author as to whether the opinions criticized in the article would be influenced based on the nurse's level of knowledge and the geriatric care environment and whether the influence was or less also required based on the facility in which the nurse practiced and/or assisted in providing geriatric care to patients. I believe that more in-depth information should be provided about the criteria and questions asked of nurses in the data collected by New York University's Hartford Institute. It is unclear what level of nurses were interviewed, what questions they were asked, and whether they had direct contact with geriatric patients. Although the author may assume that the reader, researcher and/or nurse can make some of their own hypotheses based on the information provided in the article, I believe that this type of article is intended to provide information that can be used as stand-alone research and not open to interpretation. While articles published in journals, such as this article in the Journal of Nursing Scholarship, must meet certain criteria to gain their place for publication, the criteria involved when these are reviewed vary between reviewers and journals. While there are standards in place, these differences in criteria allow articles to be varied and provide a variety of writing styles, etc. to the researcher who uses the journal. However, we must realize that when articles.