Critical Appraisal Guidelines for Single Case Study Research

The use of critical appraisal guidelines to assess the validity of research findings has become an established technique in those disciplines, such as healthcare and medicine, that encourage the use of evidence-based practice. Critical appraisal guidelines provide a rigorous set of criteria, often in the form of a checklist, against which a piece of research can be assessed. Although well established criteria exist for many forms of quantitative research, such as clinical trials and cohort studies, qualitative research is less well served. Through a synthesis of existing best practices in interpretative research this paper provides comprehensive guidelines for the conduct of single case study research and extrapolates from them a set of critical appraisal guidelines to assist in the evaluation of such work.

[1]  A. Buist,et al.  Improving Links Between Information Systems Research and Practice - Lessons from the Medical Profession , 1999 .

[2]  Graeme G. Shanks,et al.  Successfully completing case study research: combining rigour, relevance and pragmatism , 1998, Inf. Syst. J..

[3]  Clare Atkins,et al.  Reclaiming Knowledge: A Case for Evidence-Based Information Systems , 2000, ECIS.

[4]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Information systems development and data modelling: conceptual and philosophical foundations , 1995 .

[5]  Michael D. Myers,et al.  A Set of Principles for Conducting and Evaluating Interpretive Field Studies in Information Systems , 1999, MIS Q..

[6]  Paul A. Swatman,et al.  Structured-case: a methodological framework for building theory in information systems research , 2000, ECIS.

[7]  Matthew B. Miles,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook , 1994 .

[8]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  The Case Research Strategy in Studies of Information Systems , 1987, MIS Q..

[9]  N. Denzin,et al.  Handbook of Qualitative Research , 1994 .

[10]  N. Britten,et al.  Qualitative research methods in general practice and primary care. , 1995, Family practice.

[11]  Geoff Walsham,et al.  Interpretive case studies in IS research: nature and method , 1995 .

[12]  Graeme Shanks,et al.  Data Warehousing: A Preliminary Field Study , 1997 .

[13]  Henderik Alex Proper,et al.  A unifying object role modelling theory , 1995, Inf. Syst..

[14]  Angèle L. M. Cavaye,et al.  Case study research: a multi‐faceted research approach for IS , 1996, Inf. Syst. J..

[15]  Ian K Crombie,et al.  The pocket guide to critical appraisal. , 1996 .

[16]  C. Pope,et al.  Qualitative Research in Health Care , 1999 .

[17]  Joseph A. Maxwell,et al.  Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach , 1996 .

[18]  M. Patton,et al.  Qualitative evaluation and research methods , 1992 .

[19]  T. Greenhalgh,et al.  Papers that go beyond numbers (qualitative research) , 1997, BMJ.

[20]  N. Denzin,et al.  Handbook of Qualitative Research , 1994 .

[21]  J. M. Davies,et al.  Qualitative Research in Health Care , 1996, Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London.

[22]  Trisha Greenhalgh,et al.  How to read a paper: Papers that go beyond numbers (qualitative research) , 1997 .

[23]  Jennifer Sampson,et al.  Semantic integrity in data warehousing: a framework for understanding , 2002, Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[24]  Suzanne Bakken,et al.  Evidence-based Nursing Practice: A Call to Action for Nursing Informatics , 2001, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[25]  Judy McKay,et al.  Quality and Rigour of Action Research in Information Systems , 2000, ECIS.

[26]  Geoff Walsham,et al.  Interpreting Information Systems in Organizations , 1993 .