Living with HIV/AIDS in Puerto Rico Critique - Essay Example

Thus, critiquing a research work, therefore, involves a careful examination of all aspects of the study, to assess its strength, limitations, meanings, and relevance, in a bid to gain adequate up-to-date knowledge and provide essential information necessary for further studies.

Holosko (2005, p.17) opined that irrespective of the aim of any research study, before taking an in-depth look at the different sections of the research, it is important to first examine the title, abstract, and author’s affiliation, and writing style.

The purpose of title in a research study is to serve as identification, to provide information and to concisely describe the content of such research paper. Holosko (2005, p.19) argued that research titles need to be accurate, properly written and should avoid rhetorical questions. The title of the study under review sufficiently satisfies these criteria. It gives an insight into what the study is about and after reading through the report, one can say that the title accurate described the content of the research.

The writing style and language of the research article also merits commendation. The language is simple enough for everyone to understand without necessarily undermining the technical nature of the research. The writing style also complies with the APA writing styles, both in referencing, citations and format.

However, the sections of the report did not follow the format described by Holosko (2005) as the basic sections of any research study. The Introduction/Purpose subsections: Introduction, Purpose/Objective of the study, Rationale of the study and Literature review, was either completely missing or not correctly itemized. Although, this did not take away from the overall validity of the research effort, it however, is an unpleasant omission.

An abstract is supposed to provide the surface reader with in depth information about a research study, without taking too much time or space. Using the elements of a good abstract highlighted by Holosko (2005, p.21): conciseness, clarity, accuracy, specificity and active voice, as a yardstick for assessing the abstract of the study under review, the abstract can be said to meet these criteria. It is concise and provides the surface reader with enough information to decide if the whole report is worth reading. However, again this section is not titled ‘abstract’ as is the convention.

Besides the issue of labelling, which, so far, appears to be intentional or just a style of the researchers, the literature review is a good piece. It is balanced, it is presented in a manner that the Prevalence, Occurrence and Incidence of HIV/AIDS in Puerto Rico, which the study is about, can be easily determined, rationale and in the end, justifies the need for the research study; which are the criteria for an effective literature review, as proposed by Holosko (2005, p.26). Also, the information provided about the phenomenon being researched is adequate for the uninformed to understand the concept of the research.

The methodology of the research under review involved interviews with people living with HIV/AIDS, thus sample selection was done through a community based organization for people living with HIV/AIDS. This adds credibility to the samples. Besides, the fact that participants were consenting adults, had to fill a consenting form and pass through a screening questionnaire obviously ensured that the results derived from such a sample are reliable. All this add weight and credibility to the sample selection.

Both sexes were evenly represented in the sample and most had formal education. The instruments for the study and study design were all appropriately approved by the relevant body, in this case, the Institutional Review Board of the University of Puerto Rico.

A research-only becomes useful and applicable to practice after the findings have been systematically analyzed and the results presented in the appropriate format. Since the research was based on response to open-ended questions by the participants, the researchers had to analyze the responses for themes, uniformity and etc. This is evidenced in the researchers’ assertion that during the interview process, the subject of the body was brought up by participants even before it was raised by the interviewers and this was said to be common to almost all the participants (p.132).

The research findings were properly analyzed and presented. The authors were able to show that people living with HIV/AIDS see their bodies as a reflection of their serostatus and thus perceive their bodies as part of the AIDS stigma.

In conclusion, the research study can be said to be properly carried out and reported. Besides the issue of labelling the different sections of the research, the authors apparently did a good job with the research, given the context.