Skip Navigation



BJSW Advance Access published online on October 31, 2005
British Journal of Social Work, doi:10.1093/bjsw/bch361
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
37/2/335    most recent
bch361v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Taylor, B. J.
Right arrow Articles by Donnelly, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The British Association of Social Workers. All rights reserved.

Article

Grading Gems: Appraising the Quality of Research for Social Work and Social Care

Brian J. Taylor *, Martin Dempster , and Michael Donnelly

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Brian J. Taylor, E-mail: bj.taylor{at}ulster.ac.uk


  Abstract

The impetus towards basing practice and policy decisions more explicitly on sound research requires tools to facilitate the systematic appraisal of the quality of research encompassing a diverse range of methods and designs. Five exemplar tools were developed and assessed in terms of their usefulness in selecting studies for inclusion in a systematic review. The widely used ‘hierarchy of evidence’ was adapted and used to appraise internal validity. Four tools were then developed to appraise the external validity dimensions of generalizability (two scales) and methods of data collection (two scales). Methods of combining the scores generated by each tool were explored. Qualitative and quantitative studies were appraised, not separated into two spheres but by using complementary tools developed to appraise different aspects of rigour. There was a high level of agreement between researchers in applying the tools to twenty-two studies on decision making by professionals about the longterm care of older people. The scales for internal validity and generalizability discriminated between the qualities of studies appropriately. The two tools to appraise data collection gave diverse results. Excluding studies that scored in the lowest category on any scale appeared to be the scoring system that was most justifiable. This approach is presented to stimulate debate about the practical application of the evidence-based initiative to social work and social care. This study may assist in developing clearer definitions and common language about appraising rigour that should further the process of selecting robust research for synthesis to inform practice and policy decisions.

Keywords: appraisal of research, systematic review, evidence-based practice.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Research on Social Work PracticeHome page
B. Taylor, E. Wylie, M. Dempster, and M. Donnelly
Systematically Retrieving Research: A Case Study Evaluating Seven Databases
Research on Social Work Practice, November 1, 2007; 17(6): 697 - 706.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.