Rough Draft Qualitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations

Article Critique Analysis
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Name and Number
Lecturer’s Name
Assignment Due Date
Article Critique Analysis
Background of Study
The first article is that of Allory et al. (2020), and it explores the perspectives that diabetes patients who are deprived take in regard to self-care as facilitated by local teams, especially on how it relates to the local region of France. The main problem of the study was that deprived diabetic patients were not able to implement self-care in the absence of facilitators effectively. Most cases that lacked self-management regarding status identification and understanding in conjunction with drug administration were not reported accordingly. Thus, there was the need for the consideration of training of the facilitators of diabetes self-management programs. The primary significance of this study was to increase nursing practitioner involvement in promoting and encouraging the continued adoption of self-management in patients with diabetes so that the level of the chronic state of diabetes can be contained substantially and help patients achieve better health overall. The purpose was to identify respective facilitators of self-management and note the prospective obstacles that may prevent them from enrolling in DSME programs. The main objectives of the research were two, and these sought to identify barriers to facilitator entry into DSME programs and identify the local facilitators in France. The main research question was mainly posed to who the perceived facilitators of diabetes self-management are and the likely barriers that may prevent them from attending the DSME?
The second article under consideration was Schwennesen, Henriksen, and Willaing (2015), which explored why patients could fail to attend diabetes management educational programs. The article's purpose was to determine why patients do not attend or fail to attend diabetes management educational programs, even in the instance that they are provided to be attended. The significance of the study was to help uncover the main obstacles preventing patient attendance to diabetes management programs so that they eliminated and thus, help facilitate patient attendance to such self-management programs and improve the effectiveness of nursing diabetes. Objectively, the paper sought to find which main reasons patients provide for not attending self-management education programs. The question posed was, which factors prevent diabetic patients from attending self-management education programs.
How do these two articles support the nurse practice issue you chose?
Allory et al.'s (2020) article will answer if identifying the facilitators and barriers to the attendance of self-management education will be crucial to reducing A/c in type 2 diabetic patients, or it will not have any impact. Under the P factor, the article was to help identify the number of adult patients with type 2 diabetes in the primary caregiving environment. Then under the I factor, the main aim was to determine the A/c level of patients with type 2 diabetes after administering the self-care management. Under the C factor, the article was to help identify the A/c group of patients who did not attend the self-management education. Within three months, during which time the study would complete, comparisons would be made between the two groups, and the final answer drew to help answer the PICOT question. The comparisons indicate that the number of patients in the PICOT question is slightly higher than those of the research study. Lack of self-management awareness potentially reduced chances of reducing A/c levels in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Schwennesen, Henriksen, and Willaing's (2015) article will help determine if personal reasons either increased chances of attendance to DSME programs and or external environmental factors contributed to the lack of attendance of these programs. Using the P factor, the study helped to identify the number of patients who may fail to enroll in the DSME program based on given reasons, and under the I factor, the A/c level of those patients who attended and those who did not participate in was recorded before and after the study. Under the C factor, the study was to record the A/c levels of patients who did not attend before and after the lesson. The results that would be obtained would be compared in the three months of the research as well. The results possibly indicate that the A/c level of patients who attended was relatively lower than that of those who did not participate for any given reason.
Method of Study
The study app...