Four papers retrieved during the literature search, and of direct relevance to the research question, were selected for critical appraisal in this review (Cleary et al., 2012a; Cleary et al., 2012b; Deacon & Cleary, 2013; van Bogaert et al., 2013). Tables describing the characteristics of each of these papers are presented in Appendix 1. As described in those tables, three of the selected studies are qualitative (Cleary et al., 2012a; Cleary et al., 2012b; Deacon & Cleary, 2013) and one is quantitative (van Bogaert et al., 2013). In this section of the essay, published critiquing tools – the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP, 2013a; 2013b) tools – are used to critique each study’s use of some of the key elements of the research process (i.e. methodology, sampling, data collection and data analysis). It is important to note that the quantitative paper (van Bogaert et al., 2013) is a survey study, however no CASP tool specific to this type of study exists; the CASP (2013b) tool for cohort studies was deemed the most appropriate to critically analyse van Bogaert et al.’s (2013) study, though it must be noted that there are sections of this tool which are irrelevant to the study and which have been excluded from discussion in this
Four papers retrieved during the literature search, and of direct relevance to the research question, were selected for critical appraisal in this review (Cleary et al., 2012a; Cleary et al., 2012b; Deacon & Cleary, 2013; van Bogaert et al., 2013). Tables describing the characteristics of each of these papers are presented in Appendix 1. As described in those tables, three of the selected studies are qualitative (Cleary et al., 2012a; Cleary et al., 2012b; Deacon & Cleary, 2013) and one is quantitative (van Bogaert et al., 2013). In this section of the essay, published critiquing tools – the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP, 2013a; 2013b) tools – are used to critique each study’s use of some of the key elements of the research process (i.e. methodology, sampling, data collection and data analysis). It is important to note that the quantitative paper (van Bogaert et al., 2013) is a survey study, however no CASP tool specific to this type of study exists; the CASP (2013b) tool for cohort studies was deemed the most appropriate to critically analyse van Bogaert et al.’s (2013) study, though it must be noted that there are sections of this tool which are irrelevant to the study and which have been excluded from discussion in this