Answer

Research Critique: Validity, Reliability and Sampling

Article 1

            McCue, Diana and Hennum (2007) sought to assess the performance of free standing hospitals and, therefore, examined the market, management, financial and mission factors associated with freestanding hospitals with consistent positive cash flows. Through logistic regression, the same factors are then compared to those of freestanding hospitals with inconsistent positive cash flows. One of the main strengths of the study was that the performance of the two types of hospitals were compared based on similar factors, and this increased both validity and reliability of their findings. If a similar research was to be conducted to compare factors of efficiency within the healthcare industry, the approach used in this research could be considered. In contrast, the sampling was weak since the research did not include hospitals that have joined multi-hospitals. The researchers could have also included these hospitals in order to illustrate the increasing demand by freestanding hospitals to join a group of hospitals for better performance as they perform better in such groups.

Article 2

            According to Suri (2011), sampling has to be able to ensure that the selected research group is the actual representation of the entire target population for the study. In the study by Ozgen and Ozcan (2002) the sampled population was a typical representation of the wide market of centers offering dialysis services. This is one of the strengths of the study. Another strength is seen in the utilization of the data from the IRFCRD, as this allowed for comparison of a wide set of data than would have been accessible if the researchers opted to collect the data from individual hospitals in the region. The reports presented from the HCFA allowed the researchers to access a lot of information that would otherwise be inaccessible. This approach increases the validity and reliability of the study. In contrast, it is notable through the findings and conclusions that the actual percentages of efficient institutions and those with lacking performances are not clearly declared in the study. It would be better to illustrate these disparities in performances using numerical figures to support the findings and increase the validity of the research.