Fatigue, Distress, and Quality of Life in Women with Breast Cancer

Quantitative Research Article Critique
Student's First Name, Middle Initial (s), Last Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Number and Name
Instructor's Name and Title
Assignment Due Date
Quantitative Research Article Critique
Quantitative researchers utilizes several procedures in collecting and analysing data to draw meaningful conclusions. These procedures are highly sensitive and in most cases, analysts are prone to make errors in handling specific sections of the research. The article critique focuses on examining and reviewing all the procedures used towards improving future research in the field. This critique provides a detailed review of the article titled "Changes in fatigue, psychological distress, and quality of life after chemotherapy in women with breast cancer: A prospective study report" by Pok-Ja Oh and Jung-Ran Cho, stating relevant recommendations for making the article better. The criticized paper relates to changes in fatigue, psychological distress, and life after chemotherapy sessions for women fighting breast cancer. The report analyses the background of the study, objectives, methodology of the study, results obtained from the prospective study, conclusions arrived at, and implications for nursing practice. A detailed analysis of these elements reveals how they relate to the study's objective. Examination of the author's points and views gives us clear direction concerning the quality of the article. The article review will create a platform for making necessary changes based on the recommendations revealed from the critique. Based on the analysis, the authors do an excellent job in most sections but may require slight adjustments in others.
Abstract
The research abstract is precise enough to give the reader a general idea about what the study entails. According to an article published on Plos (2020), a good abstract should be structured to make the readers understand the study more easily. Oh and Cho (2018) excellently structure their abstract into background, objectives, methods, results, conclusion and implications for the study. It is quite easy to follow the study and understand what it is about based on this organization. While the question may not be stated explicitly, the authors could summarize it to give the reader a gist of what the study intended to answer. The abstract is satisfactory and needs to be further amended to make it specific and a good representative of the article. 
Introduction and Literature review
 The article's introduction and literature review are combined in one paragraph. The introductory paragraph does not clearly state the problem statement. There is no formal hypothesis that is not effectively produced in the article. The author does not justify the absence of a formal hypothesis. Having a separate introduction and literature review allows the author to provide a proper background of the topic and use the literature review to identity the gap. While the authors identify a gap in literature, some of the sources that they use are older than five years, which makes the research less reliable. For example, the source they cite as identifying a gap in literature was published in 2003, which is 15 years since the authors conducted this research. The significant difference in the number of years makes the study unreliable.
Theoretical Framework
The report clearly describes the theoretical framework the researchers utilized in the study. The significant features of the model are described, although the description is not adequate to make the reader synthesize and understand the conceptual basis of the study. The theoretical framework section also appears to be shorter and does not present a clear basis for the research. According to Grant and Osanloo (2014), the theoretical framework is the foundation of all knowledge for a research study. Therefore, it would have been more appealing if the researchers had dedicated slightly more time to this section. HRQOL needs to be clearly defined so that the reader can know what the model is and its relation to the study. The model used in the study has its limitations, thus making it an interpretive framework. The model was primarily used in cross-sectional associations; therefore, it lacks directionality about how it applies to longitudinal studies. The researcher engages in quantitative research, although the operational definitions do not correspond to the conceptual definitions of the framework. The research findings are tied back to the framework of the report. A reasonable interpretation of the findings is achieved within the context of the framework. 
Methodology Critique
The report clearly describes the variables and the number of participants used in the study. There were several confounding variables that the researchers did not explain how they handled them. For example, one's marital status could affect their level of fatigue. However, on the specific variable, there was no significant influence as only three members were unmarried. The procedure for conducting the study is clearly stated, making the reader understand the methods applied to collect data and information. The approach adopted was ethical concerning the consent of all participants involved in the study and further approval by the institutional review board of cancer in Seoul. The variables including fatigue, psychosocial distress, and quality of life are highlighted, and their measures are taken from the sample size in place. The authors measure fatigue using the Korean version of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue (FACT-F) scale, which consisted of 13 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale that ranged from 0 ("not at all") to 4 ("very much"). They measured psychological distress using the Korean version of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). There were two HAD subscales comprising 7 items and a 4-point scale ranging from 0 to 3. The total score ranged from 0 to 21 per scale, in which a higher score represented a higher level of symptomatology. The researchers used the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy – Breast Cancer version 4 (FACT-B) to measure the quality of life in breast cancer patients. The scale had 37 items with 5 subscales used to measure physical, social/family, emotional, functional well-being, and breast cancer. All these scales had good validity and reliability features, which improved the accuracy of the findings.
The study applied a non-experimental design, and thus researcher gives clear explanations for not intervening in the case. The study was longitudinal and involved the use of questionnaires. The timing and data collection were appropriate since the participants involved were few, thus making it easy to monitor all the participants. The researcher compares the measures of the previous study and the current study measures concerning fatigue levels. Questionnaires provide the researcher with an excellent base for making significant inferences since the researchers' methods were valid and reliable. 
The researchers displayed a significant description of the critical variables and the background sample characteristics concerning statistical analyses. The definition of participants' characteristics using descriptive statistics is highlighted in the study. However, the researchers do not highlight the threats of the study's validity to make the reader understand how they handled the challenges associated with selection and attrition bias. The researcher gives clear and sufficient information about the hypothesis testi...