Read the following article: Stotmeyer, E.S., Arnold, A. M., Boudreau, R. M., Ives, D.G., Cushman, M., Robbins, J. A., Harris, T. B., & Newmann, A. B. (2010). Long-term retention of older adults in the cardiovascular health study: Implications for studies of the oldest old. The Journal American Geriatrics Society, 58(4), 696-701.
Using epidemiological and biostatistical concepts, analyze the article according to the following critique questions, provide rationale.
1. In which paragraph(s) of the study is the research problem stated? Does the study present a statement of purpose? Does the study specify a research question? Is it well stated? Does the study report a hypothesis? Is the hypothesis directional or non-directional? Simple or complex? Was the hypothesis tested?
2. Was there an intervention in the study? Describe the study, is it experimental, quasi-experimental or non-experimental, prospective, longitudinal, et cetera
3. Based on the research goal, explain why the design is appropriate. Is there a design that might have been more appropriate? Why?
4. Was the power analysis procedure used to estimate (1) sample size requirements prior to undertaking the study, or (2) the likelihood of committing a Type II error? What is the implication of the presence or absence of a power analysis?
5. What is the degree to which the research methods justify the inference that the findings are true for a broader group that study participants (from sample to the population)?
6. Are the sampling criteria specifying the characteristics that a population does have and does not have clearly identified and appropriate?
7. Are there specifications of exactly what the intervention and control treatment conditions are, and how they should be administered (if applicable).
8. Which statistical test/tests were utilized in the study, where they appropriate? Why or why not? Would other types of data testing be more appropriate? Do the tests estimate the probability that results obtained from the sample reflect true population values?
9. Address whether the inferences made in the study are accurate and well founded; does the instrument (if utilized) measure what it was intended to measure.
10. To what degree does the study address a problem of significance to clinical practice in general? Are the outcomes useful for improving clinical care?
11. Is the literature review a critical summary of research on the topic? Does the reader have confidence that the review relevant, well referenced, timely, et cetera?
12. The levels of evidence are based on the ranked arrangement of the validity and dependability of evidence based on the rigor of the method that produced it; which level/levels of evidence are evidenced in the study? Explain.
13. Discuss how this study could be implemented in your own clinical practice or impact your clinical interventions in general.
14. Review the threats to validity and describe if and how they were controlled. Review the factors affecting reliability and describe if and how they were controlled.