1. Summarize the information contained in the abstract.
2. Write down the major purpose of the study.
3. Summarize the introduction (pay special attention to the topics presented, the reference citations provided, and how reference citations are used).
4. List the hypothesis of the study.
5. Evaluate whether the hypotheses follow logically from the arguments presented in the introduction.
6. Briefly summarize the information contained in each of the subsections included under the method section.
7. Evaluate whether there is sufficient information in each section to allow the study to be replicated. What is missing?
8. If your article is an experiment, list the variables manipulated by the researchers and the behaviors measured. If a correlational study is described, list the variables measured.
9. Evaluate the adequacy of the measures for testing the hypothesis (this may be difficult, but take a shot at it).
10. List the major findings of the study as reported in the results.
11. Show how statistics were used to determine the significance of the findings (what statistics were reported and how they were used).
12. Summarize and evaluate the information in the discussion. Did the author's conclusions follow logically from the results reported (why or why not)? Were there alternative explanations offered for the results?
13. In conclusion, did the study adequately evaluate the hypothesis stated in the introduction? Why or why not?
This is the article
Care, P. (2009). Discussing palliative care with patients. Ann Intern Med, 130, 744-749. (FULL TEXT)