In this assignment, you will be conducting a critical appraisal of a quantitative research study. You can find examples in your textbook in chapter 18. You may choose the quantitative study of your choice. However, the study article must have been published within the last FIVE (5) years. You will write an APA formatted paper following the criteria below: (PLEASE MAKE SURE TO READ THE CRITERIA BELOW AND ANSWER THE QUESTIONS IN YOUR PAPER). Use the table below as a tool to complete your critical appraisal.

SECTION AND Critical Appraisal Questions to Guide Evaluation
Background and Significance (see Chapters 2 and 3)
1.Does the background and significance section make it clear why the proposed study was conducted?
Research Question and Hypothesis (see Chapter 2)
1. What research question(s) or hypothesis (or hypotheses) are stated, and are they appropriate to express a relationship (or difference) between an independent and a dependent variable?
2. Has the research question(s) or hypothesis (or hypotheses) been placed in the context of an appropriate theoretical framework?
3. Has the research question(s) or hypothesis (or hypotheses) been substantiated by adequate experiential and scientific background material?
4. Has the purpose, aim(s), or goal(s) of the study been substantiated?
5. Is each research question or hypothesis specific to one relationship so that each can be either supported or not supported?
6. Given the level of evidence suggested by the research question, hypothesis, and design, what is the potential applicability to practice?
Review of the Literature (see Chapters 3 and 4)
1. Does the search strategy include an appropriate and adequate number of databases and other resources to identify key published and unpublished research and theoretical resources?
2. Is there an appropriate theoretical/conceptual framework that guides development of the research study?
3. Are both primary source theoretical and research literature used?
4. What gaps or inconsistencies in knowledge or research does the literature uncover so that it builds on earlier studies?
5. Does the review include a summary/critique of the studies that includes the strengths and weakness or limitations of the study?
6. Is the literature review presented in an organized format that flows logically?
7. Is there a synthesis summary that presents the overall strengths and weaknesses and arrives at a logical conclusion that generates hypotheses or research questions?
Internal and External Validity (see Chapter 8)
1. What are the controls for the threats to internal validity? Are they appropriate?
2. What are the controls for the threats to external validity? Are they appropriate?
3. What are the sources of bias, and are they dealt with appropriately?
4. How do the threats to internal and external validity affect the strength and quality of evidence?
5. Was the fidelity of the intervention maintained, and if so, how?
Research Design (see Chapters 9 and 10)
1. What type of design is used in the study?
2. Is the rationale for the design appropriate?
3. Does the design used seem to flow from the proposed research question(s) or hypothesis (or hypotheses), theoretical framework, and literature review?
4. What types of controls are provided by the design that increase or decrease bias?
Sampling (see Chapter 12)
1. What type of sampling strategy is used? Is it appropriate for the design?
2. How was the sample selected? Was the strategy used appropriate for the design?
3. Does the sample reflect the population as identified in the research question or hypothesis?
4. Is the sample size appropriate? How is it substantiated? Was a power analysis necessary?
5. To what population may the findings be generalized?
Legal-Ethical Issues (see Chapter 13)
1. How have the rights of subjects been protected?
2. What indications are given that institutional review board approval has been obtained?
3. What evidence is given that informed consent of the subjects has been obtained?
Data Collection Methods and Procedures (see Chapter 14)
1. Physiological measurement:
a. Is a rationale given for why a particular instrument or method was selected? If so, what is it?
b. What provision is made for maintaining accuracy of the instrument and its use, if any?
2. Observation:
a. Who did the observing?
b. How were the observers trained and supervised to minimize bias?
c. Was there an observation guide?
d. Was interrater reliability calculated?
e. Is there any reason to believe that the presence of observers affected the behavior of the subjects?
3. Interviews:
a. Who were the interviewers? How were they trained and supervised to minimize bias?
b. Is there any evidence of interview bias, and if so, what is it? How does it affect the strength and quality of evidence?
4. Instruments:
a. What is the type and/or format of the instruments (e.g., Likert scale)?
b. Are the operational definitions provided by the instruments