The analysis of the research articles can provide readers with many interesting details, reveal the controversial points, and validate the findings. This writing is a research critique of the article “Palliative Care for the Seriously Ill” written by Amy S. Kelley and R. Sean Morrison. Both authors are Doctors of Medicine. Dr. Kelley works at the Department of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (Kelley & Morrison, 2015). The title of the article clearly shows the field of research, stating that the authors research palliative care specialty that deals with seriously ill patients.

The authors clearly identify the phenomenon of the research, namely recent changes that occurred in the palliative care specialty, specifically the growth of the public and professional awareness of the palliative care, the increase in the evidence base, the innovative care delivery models, and payment mechanisms. Thus, the researchers mention that these particular changes require further qualitative research. Besides, they state that, due to innovative character, palliative care is often associated with hospice. As such, there is a need to clarify the issue and set the distinction between two terms. Finally, the authors explain in what issues the philosophy of the palliative care as a scientific approach differs from the philosophical underpinnings of the hospice.

The authors do not define clearly the exact purpose of a particular qualitative research. As it becomes evident from the analysis of the article, the main purpose of the research is to show the changes that occur in the palliative care system, analyze these changes, and suggest possible areas for the further research. The researchers do not provide the projected significance of their research to the nursing.

The article investigates the research findings of other authors. Thus, one may say that the method of the analysis is investigating, organizing and analyzing the findings of other researchers. The authors chose relevant qualitative and quantitative studies to find the information that is needed for addressing the interested issues. Thus, the collected data align with the purpose and nature of the research. For example, the authors define the key sections and advancements in palliative care practice. In particular, they name such sections as physical and psychological symptoms, spirituality, and communication skills (Kelley & Morrison, 2015, pp. 749-450). In order to discuss these broad categories, the authors research the existing studies in these sections and provide the most meaningful and recent findings in each area. Thus, they use the descriptive research method that is adequate to be utilized in this qualitative research. However, the authors should have provided explicitly the methods they used in order to add coherence to their paper.

The researchers do not discuss any sampling. However, the literature used for the research is appropriate. The authors used 57 sources to perform their analysis. Most of the sources are scholarly articles and other credible research sources. Besides, the authors used professional websites that provide authoritative opinions and research materials in palliative care.

The authors do not describe the data collection process and do not focus on primary qualitative/quantitative investigation of human experience. It is evident that they collected the data from online and library sources as they performed descriptive research and analysis of the information from various sources. The issue of the protection of human rights is not applicable to the particular research. However, the article “Palliative Care for the Seriously Ill” faces the data saturation problem. According to Fusch and Ness (2015), the failure to reach saturation leads to invalid and deficient research. The researchers mention that some of the categories are not well defined, such as certain non-pain and pain symptoms associated with terminal illnesses or the needs of patients and their families. Thus, the data are not saturated and additional research will allow overcoming the theoretical gaps and making conclusions that are more accurate.

The researchers do not explain the strategies for data collection and analysis. However, the procedures that were used to collect and analyze the data are clear for the reader. The authors defined the most important issues in palliative care, gathered the literature on these topics, analyzed information, and picked the essential findings of other researchers. At the same time, the readers are not informed about the principles of choosing particular facts and the informational insights for the article. Thus, the authors present information based on own views of relevance and necessity.

The researchers do not mention anything regarding the credibility, auditability, and fittingness of the chosen data. Nevertheless, the research seems to be credible as the authors of the article work in the field of palliative care and can adequately evaluate the current trends in research, the needs of the industry, and the associated problems.

The researchers do not document the research process. The text of the article looks more like a chapter in the book, where the structured information is presented. It is easy to follow the logic of the authors and read the article. It is well structured and coherent. The significant topics are identified with the relevant titles. Besides, the article includes several tables (Kelley & Morrison, 2015, pp. 748-749) that help to illustrate the authors’ logic and bring accuracy in the overall text.

The findings of the study can be applied in many areas. First, the study identifies the existing gaps in the evidence base and research of palliative care, which may be used by the researchers in the field (Kelley & Morrison, 2015, p. 752). Specifically, the authors mention that the serious gaps in the clinical evidence should be addressed such as the biological bases of non-pain symptoms in patients with terminal illnesses and treatment techniques for symptoms like breathlessness, delirium, and fatigue. Second, the needs of older patients and their families should be examined more carefully, especially those who have multiple conditions. Third, the research on the care methods for ill children and adults with end-stage dementia should be undertaken. Finally, there is a need for the research on the palliative care delivery systems outside hospitals, which requires additional budget allocations. Therefore, the governmental support of the research is another area where the research findings could be important. Besides, the research is interesting to read for the public as it systematizes the issues in a relatively new area of palliative care. Usually, palliative care is associated with hospice. The article allows differentiating between two specifics. The families of the seriously ill patients can benefit reading the article, as many people do not know about the possibilities of using the services of palliative care professionals. Finally, the seriously ill patients can find some useful information regarding the opportunities for treatment. The article is easy to follow and findings are easy to apprehend as they are summarized at the end of the text and reflect the strategy of the research, namely descriptive research.

The findings of the research are not formulated as a separate section. However, the reader can easily find the conclusions of the research in the last part of the “Evidence Gaps and Future Directions” section. The conceptual models, in particular, the tables, that are developed by the authors are true to the data. The findings are presented coherently and comprehensively, and they fall into the context of what is known and discussed about the phenomenon. Moreover, the researchers address both the stereotypes people have about palliative care and the modern views that allow combating the stereotypical approach.

The authors provide the context for the application of the research and give directions for the further research in the palliative sphere. The findings are presented as a concluding part of the paper that looks as a succinct generalization. The authors mention the significance of the existing and further recommended research for seriously ill patients and their families who may benefit from the improved care. Furthermore, the researchers emphasize the acute educational needs of personnel whose work is related to the field of palliative care. However, the authors do not point out the direct significance of the research to the nursing profession.

The authors utilize the Chicago/Turabian style as the in-text citations are marked with the numerical footnotes that correspond to the numbers of the endnotes in the reference list. The sources in the reference list appear in the same order as they appear in the text (not in the alphabetical order as in APA style).