NURS 5052 / 6052: Essentials Of Evidence-Based Practice

Article had 64& plagiarism, needs to be re submitted in writers original terms.
NURS 5052/NURS 6052: ESSENTIALS OF EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE
Week 6
Introduction Resources Discussion Assignment Week in Review
☰
Menu
×
NURS 5052/NURS 6052: Essentials of Evidence-Based Practice
Back to Blackboard
Syllabus
Course Calendar
Course Overview
Course Information
Resource List
Week 1
Week 2
Week 3
Week 4
Week 5
Week 6
Week 7
Week 8
Week 9
Week 10
Week 11
Student Support
Walden Links
Guidelines and Policies
Back to Blackboard
Help
Colorful charts and graphs
Week 6: Quantitative Research Designs—Part 2
Reflect on the following scenarios:
Wanda has been involved in a research study of the causes of tooth decay in elementary school children. Twenty-five percent of the students in the free breakfast program at a local school have been screened by a local dental hygienist. The dental hygienist finds an average of 3.5 cavities per student. The same dental hygienist recently screened 25% of the students in a school with no free breakfast program, and found an average of only 1.5 cavities per student. Wanda concludes that the breakfast served to students is the cause of higher tooth decay. Do you agree with Wanda? Can you think of other causes for the higher number of cavities among the students from the school with free breakfast?
Jerry is conducting a phone survey to determine public opinions on Medicaid reform. In order to get a random sample, Jerry decides to call the tenth number on the second column of every fifth page of the phone book. He also decides to stop sampling when he has completed 50 surveys. After reaching the target number, Jerry begins to analyze the data he has gathered and is surprised to find that opposition to reform is running about 18% higher than the national average. He is at a quandary to explain this significant difference in numbers. What are some reasons you can think of for the higher rate of opposition?
As you consider these scenarios, you may note issues or problems related to the validity of the research and conclusions. This week, you assess validity in quantitative research. You are introduced to the different types of validity and why they are important to consider when evaluating evidence and research studies. You also examine common threats to validity and consider how to minimize those threats.
Learning Objectives
Students will:
Evaluate the internal validity of quantitative research studies
Assess the consequences of failing to analyze validity in quantitative research studies
Photo Credit: [Graphs and charts]/[E+]/Getty Images
Learning Resources
Note: To access this week's required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.
Required Readings
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2017). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (10th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
Chapter 10, “Rigor and Validity in Quantitative Research”
This chapter introduces the concept of validity in research and describes the different types of validity that must be addressed. Key threats to validity are also explored.
Chapter 11, “Specific Types of Quantitative Research”
This chapter focuses on the specific types of quantitative research that can be selected. The focus is on the purpose of the research rather than the research design. These include such approaches as clinical trials, evaluation research, health services and outcomes research, needs assessments, or replication studies.
Cantrell, M. A. (2011). Demystifying the research process: Understanding a descriptive comparative research design. Pediatric Nursing, 37(4), 188–189.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

The author of this article discusses the primary aspects of a prominent quantitative research design. The article examines the advantages and disadvantages of the design.
Schultz, L. E., Rivers, K. O., & Ratusnik, D. L. (2008). The role of external validity in evidence-based practice for rehabilitation. Rehabilitation Psychology, 53(3), 294–302.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

This article details the results of a study that sought to balance concern for rigor with concern for relevance. The authors of the article derive and determine a rating format for relevance and apply it to cognitive rehabilitation.

Note: For the Discussion this week, you will need to read the method section of one of the following quasi-experimental studies. Refer to the details provided in the Week 6 Discussion area.
Metheny, N. A., Davis-Jackson, J., & Stewart, B. J. (2010). Effectiveness of an aspiration risk-reduction protocol. Nursing Research, 59(1), 18–25.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
Padula, C. A., Hughes, C., & Baumhover, L. (2009). Impact of a nurse-driven mobility protocol on functional decline in hospitalized older adults. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 24(4), 325–331.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
Yuan, S.-C., Chou, M.-C., Hwu, L.-J., Chang, Y.-O., Hsu, W.-H., & Kuo, H.-W. (2009). An intervention program to promote health-related physical fitness in nurses. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 18(10), 1,404–1,411.
Walden University. (n.d.a.). Paper templates. Retrieved July 23, 2012, from http://writingcenter(dot)waldenu(dot)edu/57.htm

This resource provides you access to the School of Nursing Sample Paper, which will serve as a template for formatting your papers.
Document: Critique Template for a Qualitative Study (Word document)

Note: You will use this document to complete this week's Assignment.
Document: Critique Template for a Quantitative Study (Word document)

Note: You will use this document to complete this week's Assignment.
Document: Critique Template for a Mixed-Methods Study (Word document)

Note: You will use this document to complete this week's Assignment.
Discussion: Validity in Quantitative Research Designs
Validity in research refers to the extent researchers can be confident that the cause and effect they identify in their research are in fact causal relationships. If there is low validity in a study, it usually means that the research design is flawed and the results will be of little or no value. Four different aspects of validity should be considered when reviewing a research design: statistical conclusion validity, internal validity, construct validity, and external validity. In this Discussion, you consider the importance of each of these aspects in judging the validity of quantitative research.
To prepare:
Review the information in Chapter 10 of the course text on rigor and validity.
Read the method section of one of the following quasi-experimental studies (also located in this week's Learning Resources). Identify at least one potential concern that could be raised about the study's internal validity.
Metheny, N. A., Davis-Jackson, J., & Stewart, B. J. (2010). Effectiveness of an aspiration risk-reduction protocol. Nursing Research, 59(1), 18–25.
Padula, C. A., Hughes, C., & Baumhover, L. (2009). Impact of a nurse-driven mobility protocol on functional decline in hospitalized older adults. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 24(4), 325–331.
Yuan, S., Chou, M., Hwu, L., Chang, Y., Hsu, W., & Kuo, H. (2009). An intervention program to promote health-related physical fitness in nurses. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 18(10), 1,404–1,411.
Consider strategies that could be used to strengthen the study's internal validity and how this would impact the three other types of validity.
Think about the consequences of an advanced practice nurse neglecting to consider the validity of a research study when reviewing the research for potential use in developing an evidence-based practice.
By Day 3
Post the title of the study that you selected and your analysis of the potential concerns that could be raised about the study's internal validity. Propose recommendations to strengthen the internal validity and assess the effect your changes could have with regard to the other three types of validity. Discuss the dangers of failing to consider the validity of a research study.
Read a selection of your colleagues' responses.
By Day 6
Respond to at least two of your colleagues in one or more of the following ways:
Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, and evidence. Share an insight from having read your colleagues' postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.
Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own review of the literature in the Walden Library.
Validate an idea with your own experience and additional sources.
Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.
Expand on your colleagues' postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.
Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Week 6 Discussion Rubric
Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 6
To participate in this Discussion:
Week 6 Discussion
Assignment: Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies
Critiquing the validity and robustness of research featured in journal articles provides a critical foundation for engaging in evidence-based practice. In Weeks 5 and 6, you explored quantitative research designs. In Week 7, you will examine qualitative and mixed methods research designs. For this Assignment, which is due by Day 7 of Week 7, you critique a quantitative and either a qualitative or a mixed methods research study and compare the types of information obtained in each.
To prepare:
Select a health topic of interest to you that is relevant to your current area of practice. The topic may be your Course Portfolio Project or a different topic of your choice.
Using the Walden Library, locate two articles in scholarly journals that deal with your portfolio topic: 1) Select one article that utilizes a quantitative research design and 2) select a second article that utilizes either a qualitative OR a mixed methods design. These need to be single studies not systematic or integrative reviews (including meta-analysis and metasynthesis). You may use research articles from your reference list. If you cannot find these two types of research on your portfolio topic, you may choose another topic.
Locate the following documents in this week's Learning Resources to access the appropriate templates, which will guide your critique of each article:
Critique Template for a Qualitative Study
Critique Template for a Quantitative Study
Critique Template for a Mixed-Methods Study
Consider the fields in the templates as you review the information in each article. Begin to draft a paper in which you analyze the two research approaches as indicated below. Reflect on the overall value of both quantitative and qualitative research. If someone were to say to you, “Qualitative research is not real science,” how would you respond?
To complete this Assignment:
Complete the two critiques using the appropriate templates.
Write a 2- to 3-page paper that addresses the following:
Contrast the types of information that you gained from examining the two different research approaches in the articles that you selected.
Describe the general advantages and disadvantages of the two research approaches featured in the articles. Use examples from the articles for support.
Formulate a response to the claim that qualitative research is not real science. Highlight the general insights that both quantitative and qualitative studies can provide to researchers. Support your response with references
WRITTEN
Evaluating Quantitative, Qualitative or Mixed Research Methodologies An Overview As the quest for scientifically evidenced based knowledge to improve outcomes continue to advance, results of study can be modified if researchers utilize an erroneous system or strategy to answer their research question. It is vital for nurses to evaluate the article and ascertain the validity of the study prior to applying the findings into practice. The goal of this author is to review the knowledge conferred within the analysis of a quantitative and a qualitative study. Including, the pros and consequences of utilizing respective processes and weigh in on the remunerations of both methodology's in study.
2 In this Assignment, the author will attempt to evaluate quantitative and Qualitative research methods of conducting a study, the article that the writer chose would be the research study on Central Line Associated Blood Stream Infections. The quantitative methodology, is focused on the effect of antimicrobial peripherally inserted central catheter on central Line-Associated Bloodstream infections in a Hospital Environment, whereas the qualitative study is focused on disparities in risk perceptions: a qualitative study is about facilitating central line associated bloodstream infection prevention. Both studies focused on central line Association blood stream infections, the pros and cons of individual studies will be addressed as well as the diverse methods to the studies. Formats on each study methodology also be addressed.
2 Quantitative research is generally firmly associated with positivism (Polit and Beck), in quantitative research the numerical data is acquired from a formal measurement and is analyzed statistically. While qualitative research is associated with constructivist inquiry (Polit & Beck).
Data gathered from each Methodology An ample amount of data was gathered from both research methodologies. 2 Central line associated blood stream infections (CLABSI) is a major basis for thousands of deaths per year and accumulating to billions of dollars in additional costs to U.S. health care system (CDC, N/D). Sadly enough, these infections are avoidable, if only health care professionals as custodians of peoples' health, employ appropriate care and practice.
The two articles provided an in-depth understanding of Central line diseases, utilizing diverse data and methodologies. 2 The quantitative research is about the measures to take in the counteractive action of Central line related infections; the study is to expose the impact of an antimicrobial peripherally inserted central catheter on central line associated bloodstream infections, and was conducted in the hospital settings using real patients to determine the effect of antimicrobial catheter on CLABSI. Authentic patients were engaged in practice and prove the result of the study, it was a hand on experimental study. The approach was a quasi-experimental, data was collected on two different patients, one part is the interventional group and the second was the non-interventional group, this study shows a statistically significant decrease in the rate of CLABSI (Rutkoff G 2014). The study was an initial step towards using nursing research to propose a change to current central line infection prevention strategies (Rutkoff 2014).
The second analysis is the qualitative study that was conducted to compare the perceptions of infection control professionals(ICP) and frontline staff, the result of this study was based on the observation and experiences of people, it was not an experimental study, multiple perceptions were used to determine the result of the study. 3 The experiment was conducted with key mole interviews at 8 hospitals that participated in the agency for healthcare research and quality CLABSI prevention initiative. 2 Interview statistics were analyzed using 50 frontline nurses and 26 ICPs' to identify mutual factors related to program facilitators and challenges (Hefner J. 2014). The result could not be absolutely accurate since it was based on perceptions, feelings and thoughts of the patients.
Pros and Cons of research Methodologies Both qualitative and quantitative research are utilized as a part of focusses all through many disciplines. Qualitative and quantitative approaches are imbibed in Researches in many facets of life, both methods, like everything else, have their pros and cons, which is contingent on the focus and goal of the investigators. Qualitative research focuses largely on the comprehensive and thorough accounts of events while quantitative research focuses on creating numerical representations to clarify procedures.
2 On the article: the influence of an antimicrobial peripherally inserted central catheter on central line associated bloodstream infections in a hospital environment, which is a quantitative research, there are various advantages and disadvantages to the approach of this study. The study is designed to enable the researcher avoid ethical issues associated with withholding a treatment from the patients while using a current intervention to evaluate the effect of the antimicrobial picc on CLABSI incidence (Rutkoff G 2014). This approach is the best one when statistics is used to determine the effect of an intervention and draw conclusion about its effects (Rutkoff G 2014). With this approach the use of randomized study with coexisting controls would have been more scientifically viable. The disadvantage of the evaluation method would be the boundaries of the quasi-experimental design, the quasi-experimental methodology could only deliver evidence of probability and the study's generalizability is questionable due to the small size (Rutfoff, G 2014). bias and statistical tests were used to compare demographic characteristics (Rutkoff G 2014). Qualitative research is all about how people feel about a research Analysis. In the qualitative research the CLABSI initiatives are in place and the study sought to observe the staffs' perceptions. The pro of this study is that it will illustrate why the initiative was either an accomplishment or a catastrophe. 2 The article points out that in the study, CLABSI lessening plans that encompassed frontline staff in design and execution had a higher success rate. The qualitative research will highlight the barricades of the interposition giving the researcher a way to intensify the probabilities of accomplishment. 2 The article demonstrations challenges like the need for capitals to carry out the experiment that would not be visible in a quantitative research.
Qualitative research is all about how people experience a research study. In the qualitative research the CLABSI initiatives are in place and this study aimed at observing the staffs' perceptions. 2 The advantage of this research is that it will show why the initiative is a success or a failure. In the article points out that in the study that CLABSI reduction programs that included frontline staff in design and implementation had a higher success rate. The qualitative research will highlight the barriers of the intervention giving the researcher a way to increase the odds of success. The article shows possible obstacles like the need for resources to carry out the initiative that would not show up in a quantitative research.
Dispositions gained In as much as qualitative research is not considered fully as a main part of psychological research and theory, it is still scientific (Howitt & Cramer, 2011). For an examination to be viewed as logical it ought to be substantial, solid, and ready to be summed up. In subjective research the analysts are more associated with the circumstance while leading the examination, it is more subjective and might have less opportunities to be substantial, and non-legitimate outcomes are not logical. In any case, subjective scientists have their own techniques for guaranteeing legitimacy, which is the member's approval. All together hand if the examination bodes well to members at that point there must be some legitimacy.
2 Quantitative and Qualitative Methodology Analysis As relates to Research, the fundamental research strategies would be quantitative and Qualitative whilst the mixed approach would be another technique that coordinates both methodologies. It is therefore of utmost importance for Nurses to evaluate literature that is apt to a subject in question and expected outcome as to be able the wisely select the best approach.
2 Quantitative research is a sort of research that is done on an evaluation that can be precisely and truly appraised, while Qualitative research is imperative when a detailed emphasis of the rationale motive for a fact, also a need to stimulate ideas and hypothesis for quantitative survey is desired. With qualitative research, the collection of data is based on flexible techniques, for instance: unstructured interviews and also group discussions while quantitative survey uses very highly structured and rigid techniques when collecting its data, such as pre-formulated questions. With subjective research, the accumulation of information depends on adaptable procedures, for example: unstructured meetings and furthermore gather talks while quantitative review utilizes profoundly organized and unbending strategies when gathering its information, for example, pre-defined inquiries. Subjective research is constantly exploratory and investigative while quantitative gives only a knowledge to some proposal. With subjective research, factual information examination isn't included while it is associated with quantitative.
Generally speaking, subjective research is great in giving definite data that gives light on a comprehension of the investigation, while quantitative research accumulates dependable data and information that can be utilized as a part of determining the root cause and outcome analysis relationship in a status quo.
Conclusion This paper gave an evaluation of quantitative and qualitative research studies, the paper embraces a brief account of qualitative and quantitative research method findings, the pros and cons of both research techniques portrayed, including the distinctive ways to go about choosing the Research method. This paper contains the two critiquing layouts for the two Analysis. Both quantitative and Qualitative methodologies are valuable and give credible data supported, scientific evidence based holistic values to researchable questions. choosing to utilize a quantitative or subjective research technique won't not be a simple task, particularly if the researcher is not conversant with the issues related to each.
4 References Rutkoff G (2014)The Influence of Antimicrobial Peripherally Inserted Catheter on Central Line –Associated Bloodstream Infections in a Hospital Environment retrieved from http://dx(dot)doi(dot)org/10.1016/j.java.2014.06.002 Hefner J (2014). 2 Facilitating Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infection Prevention: A qualitative study comparing perspectives of infection control professionals and frontline staff retrieved from http://www(dot)ajicjournal(dot)orgarticle/s0196-6553(14)00649-X/fulltext
4 QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE Your name: 2 Nnenna Olivia Udoji Week 6 Assignment: Application: 2 Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies Date: 01/11/18 Article reference (in APA style): 5 Rutkoff, G (2014). 4 The Influence of Antimicrobial Peripherally Inserted Catheter on Central Line –Associated NURS 5052/NURS 6052 Bloodstream Infections in a Hospital Environment retrieved from http://dx(dot)doi(dot)org/10.1016/j.java.2014.06.002
6 QUALITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE NURS 5052/NURS 6052 Week 6 Assignment: Application: 2 Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies Date: 01/11/18 Nnenna Olivia Udoji
2 Research Concepts and Purpose
Problem The scientist shed light on the significance of utilizing more training on teaching tis the need for training programs that will ensure proper techniques in caring for patients with Central lines.
Rationale.
Rationale The motivation behind the investigation is to improve persistent focused care by recognizing the patient's view on the significance of perceived good practices by care providers.
The researcher's personal perspective is that there is a need for Infection control training to care givers/ health care providers.
7 Literature Analysis The review of literature that the researcher reported involved multiple resources that was current in the past five years. No existing proof was provided that article was critiqued by writer. 7 All resources are relevant to the purpose of the research and provided an integrated summary of was pertinent to the evaluation of question. The creator did not report the nature of the writing, but rather gave a synopsis of the outcomes.
Theoretical versus Conceptual Framework There was no hypothetical or theoretical system detailed by audit of the writing the specialists used the engaging hypothesis Populace Criteria.
8 The subjects were real patients in the hospital setting, selected purposively and was recruited by personal invitation. Purposively sampling is appropriate for this study and allowed the researchers to select patients that were experiencing the issue at stake. The size was appropriate to setting.
Human rights and HIPPA Human rights.
Consent was sought and obtained, information provided prior to study. Their rights to privacy were not violated.
7 Design Design of the study.
The researchers used standard methodologies for the study.
Strategies for Data collection Methodologies The researchers used structured guides to simplify study, observations and interviews were conducted.
Consistency Patients who were experiencing the issue at hand and in the hospital, were the subjects.
Statistics Examination Methodology for analysis.
The information was investigated utilizing SPSS ver. 13.0.
Verdicts The Interpretation of the result.
Findings from this study demonstrate hospital care related blood stream infection of the central lines are avoidable and requires skills training for nurses Discussion of Findings The discoveries of the study are in line with past investigations that were accounted for by the evaluator.
Borders of Study The study is limited by findings from patients in a particular health care setting. 1 The primary author had a relationship with the cancer center, making subject accrual convenient.
Proposals The inferences for training was resolute with the conclusions of the study.
Implications There is need for more research, and skill content for nurse training and syllabus assessment.
9 Recommendations The research findings is appropriate in my current work setting. Infection control and the application of skills in delivering safe care would be beneficial. 1 I would further study this program in other studies before this explicit model would be adopted in practice.