UNDERTAKE A CRITICAL REVIEW OF THE METHODS SECTION OF THE ARTICLE BY MORRELL, PARK, KIDDER AND MARTIN ON ADHERENCE TO ANTIHYPERTENSIVE MEDICATIONS ACROSS THE LIFE SPAN

This assignment involves a critical review of the methods section of the article by Morrell, Park, Kidder, and Martin on Adherence to Antihypertensive Medications across the Life Span. Specifically, for this assignment please review the Morrell et al. article in terms of questions 11, 12, and 13 of the Critical Outline. For your convenience, those questions are reproduced below. In answering these questions please be sure to provide rich detail, that is, provide information and evidence from the article that explains and justifies any point or answer you give. In other words, from your answers alone I should have a rich and detailed understanding of the article. In addition, rather than quoting from the article, put the authors points in your own words. Quotes should be used only rarely to support a point.

Research Design

11. What was the study’s research case? (Did the authors collect data on individuals, neighborhoods, cities, states, nations? If individuals, which specific individuals? If cities, which specific cities?) Is the research case an appropriate empirical reflection of the study’s unit of analysis? In other words, is the research case on the same level as that of the unit of analysis, e.g., both on the individual level or both on the ecologic level? If the conceptual model articulates a multilevel research question, did the authors in fact collect data on all hypothesized levels? If the conceptual model suggests crossing socio-temporal comparisons, did the authors in fact collect data on research cases representing those different socio-temporal contexts?

12. What method was used for sample selection, random or non-random selection? If a random sample was selected, what was the rate of non-response? Was any strategy used to assess the impact of this non-response rate on the study and its findings? Do you have any concern that the non-response might be substantial enough to affect the studys generalizability? If a convenience sample was selected, did the authors provide any justification for this decision? Did they make it clear that they would not, therefore, be able to generalize their findings to anyone other than their own sample? That is, did they acknowledge the limitations that result from using a non-random sample?

13. What was the sample size? Was there any indication that the authors conducted a power analysis (calculation) to determine the appropriate sample size in advance of conducting the study? Does the sample appear small, e.g., 50 or less? Do you think that the sample might be too small and, therefore, that the results of the study might be unstable, unrepresentative, and prone to Type II statistical error? Do the authors acknowledge any of the problems that might result from having a small sample?