Published on March 9, 2008
How to criticise quantitative research?Lecture II – Results, Discussion and Conclusion: How to criticise quantitative research? Lecture II – Results, Discussion and Conclusion Chee-Wee Tan Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh Section: Results: Section: Results Were all planned outcomes reported? Anything missing? Is something dubious going on here? Anything added not previous set out? Section: Results - Presentation: Section: Results - Presentation Were the figures and tables clear? Any misleading figures or tables? Figure A Figure B Section: Results - Analysis: Section: Results - Analysis Were appropriate statistics used? Were interpretations of analysis reasonable? Any additional tests conducted that were not planned? (c.f. discussion) Common error: If you throw a lot of tests at it, something is bound to stick! Section: Discussion: Section: Discussion Was a concise summary of the main results offered? Were interpretations of their results reasonable? Guernica – Picasso, Pablo (1881-1973) Section: Discussion: Section: Discussion Common errors: Non-significant results ignored Non-significant results interpreted as proof of no effect Correlation does not imply causation Ad hominem Appeal to tradition/authority Confirmation bias Etc… Section: Discussion - Application: Section: Discussion - Application Basic studies - onus on reader to apply it. Sometimes, they do offer potential applications. Clinical – some indication how findings may influence practice Section: Conclusion & Abstract: Section: Conclusion & Abstract Conclusion consistent with the rest of paper? How to be good at this?: How to be good at this? Never take any statements at face value. Criticise, criticise, criticise!