How to Critique a Scientific Article

Critiquing scientific articles can be challenging, but easier if broken down in steps.

Reading scientific articles can be a mental workout, and critiquing one can feel overwhelming. Evaluating a scientific article is a way to consider the truthfulness of the research and the relevancy and applicability of the results. Scientific articles have several points to consider, including the title, the introduction, methods, results and the conclusion. Breaking down your critique into each part can make your evaluation easier.

Instructions

1. Evaluate the title after reading the entire article. The title should reflect the content of the work in a clear, concise manner that captures the attention of the reader.

2. Look for background and author information in the introduction. The author should be qualified to write on the subject. Background information should be adequately researched, including dates and names of people who have performed similar case studies or research. The objective of the article should be clear in the introduction.

3. Methods explain the equipment used, the procedure, how data was selected, sample size and statistics used to back up claims. Question if the sample size justifies the claims made in the article. Check if participants were randomly selected, or if there was a bias in selecting them. Note if claims are unsubstantiated by the research, or if there are confounding variables, which can show a false correlation between tests and results. A confounding variable may reveal another factor for results in a test. For example, if a study is on the death rate for heavy drinkers, it may ignore that heavy drinkers are more likely to smoke or eat fast food, which can also attribute to early death.

4. Results should be clear with the objectives stated in the introduction declared met or unmet by the author. The writer's interpretation should follow the results of the research or case study. Be aware of claims not substantiated by the research noted in the article. Results should be able to be generalized with the population, or the noted segment of the population studied in the article.

5. The conclusion should reiterate what was said in the body of the article and not include any new information.

Tips & Warnings

• A good critique summarizes the good and the bad in an article. Give attention to the merits of an article as well as its demerits.

References

• Society of Radiographers: How to Critique a Scientific Article
• Florida International University: How to Read a Scientific Article
• Berkley: Paper critique instructions