Skip to main content

Table 6 Summary Quantitative Studies and Critical Appraisal Checklista (n = 24)

From: A systematic review of non-pharmacological interventions to improve nighttime sleep among residents of long-term care settings

Criteria Yes No
1. Are the aims and objectives of the study clearly stated? 24 0
2. Are the hypotheses and research questions clearly specified? 24 0
3. Are the dependent and independent variables clearly stated? 23 1
4. Have the variables been adequately operationalized? 23 1
5. Is the design of the study adequately described? 24 0
6. Are the research methods appropriate? 22 2
7. Were the instruments used appropriate and adequately tested for reliability and validity? 16 8
8. Is there an adequate description of the source of the sample, inclusion and exclusion criteria, response rates, and (in the case of longitudinal research and post-test in experiments) sample attrition? 20 4
9. Was the statistical power of the study to detect or reject differences (types I and II error) discussed critically? 5 19
10. Are ethical considerations presented? 5 19
11. Was the study piloted? 11 13
12. Were the statistical analyses appropriate and adequate? 22 2
13. Are the results clear and adequately reported? 23 1
14. Does the discussion of the results report them in the light of the hypotheses of the study and other relevant literature? 22 2
15. Are the limitations of the research and its design presented? 20 4
16. Does the discussion generalize and draw conclusion beyond the limits of the data and number and type of people studied? 11 13
17. Can the findings be generalized to other relevant population and time periods? 21 3
18. Are the implications-practical or theoretical-of the research discussed? 12 12
19. Who was the sponsor of the study, and was there a conflict of interest? 11 2
(11 NI)
  1. NI Not indicated; aChecklist from Bowling A. Research methods in health: investigating health and health services. 4th ed. Maidenhead Berkshire, England: Open University Press, 2014