Presentation Transcript
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!