The purpose of this report is to conduct a critical appraisal of a published article.

Carnwell (1997) describes a critical appraisal as an unbiased and balanced

scrutiny of the research paper so that both its strengths and weaknesses are

highlighted. The focus of the appraisal with be on “Promoting the health of

people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; patients and their carer’s

views” (Caress et al, 2010). The format of the appraisal will be formed around a

set of criteria (see appendix 1).

The journal looks at the views of patients and their carer’s experiences with living

the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), its causes, how they manage

with the symptoms, its progression and what role
However no time frame was given. Family

members of agreeing participants were then contacted by telephone, but only

after consent was obtained. The participants were then all given information

detailing their involvement. Non-malficence implies an intention of not harming

and preventing harm occurring to participants both of a physical and

psychological nature (Parahoo, 2006). Perhaps it would have been beneficial for

the researchers to set up a small support group after the research had been

conducted to ensure there were no issues with the participants. Beneficence is

establishing the research is of a useful nature and if it will help society in general

(Coughlan et al, 2007). Caress et al (2010) have established that COPD is a

worldwide cause of mortality and morbidity which is putting significant pressure

on the economy. Therefore it is safe to say that by carrying research in

maximising the health in COPD patients is going to be very beneficial to the

patients and society as by promoting better health puts less stress on the

National Health Service thus saving money. The researchers have also

acknowledged the contribution of the professor in respiratory medicine for his

development on the project. Polit and Beck (2010) suggest that a “Risk

assessment” should be carried out as