Article Appraisal (Article Critique Sample)

Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
Article Appraisal
Part 1: Research Question
Q1. The abstract and introductory parts of the paper define the intended purpose and the objectives to be achieved in the context.
Q2. The title of the paper states that the content focuses on a meta-analytic review of specific literature.
Q.3. The abstract and introduction explicitly state the papers aim to delineate the relationship (if any) between one’s optimistic approach to life and subsequent physical wellness. The authors explicitly state the intention to achieve given objectives through a metanalytic review. The paper did not consider any unique population, as it only focused on past studies that reviewed particular areas of interest. It would use the identified studies to develop a set of Effect Sizes (ESs) and apply the random effects model to analyze them. Further, it does not offer any interventions as its aims were to attain theoretical conclusions, indicating whether optimism was a significant predictor of the desired health outcomes.
Part 2: Study Method
Q1. The review included appropriate studies, which fulfilled a set of criteria. Therefore, the selected literature addressed the study question directly or indirectly. Besides, they have an acceptable study design, including using measurements to identify the relevant variables.
Q2. The reviewers tried to identify relevant studies through a computerized search. They expanded the search through hand-searching journals and used an ancestry approach to identify studies missing from the previous searches. The search focused on only English peer-reviewed bibliographic databases, excluding non-English ones. The review indicated neither a follow-up from the reference list nor a personal contact with the experts. Additionally, unpublished studies and non-English articles were excluded from the search.
Q3. The reviewers did not assess the quality of the included studies. However, from the selection criteria, they ensured that the articles were peer-reviewed and used specific measurement systems for the relevant variables.
Part 3: Results and Discussion
Q1. It was reasonable to combine results and develop ESs for uniformity of variables. Besides, the results of each study used have been included in the appendix. The results share similarities even for heterogeneous variables, especially in clusters of health outcomes. The variations noted are minimal and considered statistically insignificant.
Q2. The results are presented based on the subjective or objective traits assessed. LOT and LOT-R factors are used to measure the results, with the outcome ranging between 0.1, 0.3, and 0.5 for small, medium, and large effects, respectively. The review is partially conclusive since it attains its objectives but fails to address the gray areas in the results obtained, such as how to categorize the in-between values. The conclusions showed a clear correlation between optimism and health outcomes.
Q3. The results are relat