Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper

Introduction

Cancer management is typically challenging with most of the focus being on its diagnosis and treatment. However, experience shows that continuing with normal daily activities presents a concern to cancer patients. In fact, both medical personnel and patients are concerned with how they can organize cancer management in a manner that not only facilitates diagnosis and treatment efforts but also supports a faster return to normal daily activities before the diagnosis or treatment. Wang et al. (2013) noted the concern of how best to ensure that cancer patients can continue with the activities they engaged in before the diagnosis or treatment, indicating that sexual well-being was one of the capacities that suffered following diagnosis and treatment.

Thomas et al. (2015) expressed similar sentiments while noting that the patients’ ability to carry out normal activities because their arm mobility was compromised. In this respect, the clinical problem is presented as the personal, social and professional disruptions that cancer diagnosis and treatment causes, as well as how this disruption can be addressed to improve outcomes Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper.

ORDER YOUR PAPER HERE

Overview of the clinical problem

It is clear that cancer diagnosis and treatment compromises the capacity to continue performing daily activities with the same intensity. The problems start from diagnosis to treatment even as the patient transitions from ill-health to healthiness. Although the change is a concern with the possibility that it would take longer to achieve even as personal, social and professional activities suffer, the proposal is presented that support groups could address this concern by improving the patients’ capacity to solve these problems. Similar concerns were noted by Taleghani et al. (2012) who went on to propose that peer support groups could address the issue. The article mentions that providing patients with a forum in which they can share ideas with their peers would not only improve their capacity to adhere to the treatment plan but also improve their quality of life even as they face the reality of being sick. Smith (2012) notes that support groups are particularly useful when facing terminal ailments and helping patients to achieve speedy normalcy. That is because these groups provide peers with a forum where they can hold discussions among themselves to develop practical personalized solutions. Through the use of support groups, cancer patients are expected to fixate on the problems particular to them while applying a non-specific agenda that coalesces medical advice with personal experiences to solve their personal, professional and social issues resultant from the medical condition. Besides that, support groups hold open-ended discussions where the facilitators take on a reduced role, and the discussion is not constrained with the focus being on the inclusion process (Smith, 2012)Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper. In this respect, it is anticipated that support groups would offer cancer patients an opportunity to address the personal, social and professional disruptions resultant from cancer diagnosis and treatment.

Population

The population of interest is cancer patients who are already undergoing treatment or are yet to start treatment. They will be recruited from a cancer treatment facility with the inclusion criteria being a cancer diagnosis, age exceeding 25 years, and a willingness to participate in the study as evidenced by a signed informed consent form.

Intervention

The intervention of interest is the use of group support system along with standard medical practice whereby cancer patients get an opportunity to interact with each other and share their experiences. Through sharing experiences, the patients can share practical solutions to their personal, social and professional problems brought about by their cancer diagnosis and treatment. The intervention will determine how fast the patients recovered their personal, social and professional life prior to the diagnosis and treatment. This will be measured through interviews that evaluate their recovery speed.

Comparison

The comparison of interest is the use of a standard medical practice that includes routine counseling for the patients to facilitate acceptance but does not address the personal, social and professional problems brought about by their cancer diagnosis and treatment. The comparison will be measured by evaluating the recovery speed for those who underwent the intervention (study group) versus those who did not undergo the intervention (control group). Given that the difference between the study and control groups is the intervention, then any differences noted between the recovery times for the two groups will be attributed to the intervention. Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper

Outcome

The outcome of interest is the speedier return to normal daily activities before the diagnosis and treatment. This implies that the two approaches will be compared to identify the method that allows the patients to resume a normal life at a faster rate.

PICO(T) Question

The PICOT question, based on the discussed problem and proposed solution, is presented that Among cancer patients (P), do peer support groups in addition to standard medical management approaches (I) versus standard medical management approaches used in isolation (C) have an influence on how fast the patient resumes normal professional, personal and social life after diagnosis and during treatment as evaluated through interviews (O) with the results measured over a period of six-months (T)? The question has been presented using the five elements of PICOT. The population of interest is cancer patients who are either undergoing treatment or newly diagnosed. The intervention under review entails subjected the selected patients to peer support groups where they are supervised to engage each other in discussing their problems brought about by the cancer condition while also developing personalized solutions. The control entails subjecting the patients to a standard medical practice that includes routine counseling. The expected outcome is a faster return to personal, professional and social life for the patients subjected to the peer support groups. The desired result is expected to be seen in six months of the study beginning.

ORDER YOUR PAPER HERE

Principle of Respect

For research studies involving human subjects, ethics is considered as the values and conduct ascribed to the participants with a view to ensuring that their welfare is the primary concern of the researcher. Of particular concern to such studies is the principle of respect whereby every human participant is respected for himself or herself. This implies that the participants would be viewed as autonomous entities, and those with cognitive disabilities would be entitled to their autonomy being protected (Monette, Sullivan & DeJong, 2013)Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper. For the present study, the principle of respect has been incorporated in the manner in which human participants are handled. All the participants will be voluntarily recruited into the study after being given adequate information that allows them to make an informed decision on whether or not to participate in the study by signing a consent form. In addition, the study recognizes that there is a possibility for the participants to be unduly influenced or slyly coerced to participate in the study. The present study protects against coercion by firstly not offering any incentive to participate and allowing them to withdraw from the study at any point. In this respect, the present study incorporates the principle of respect in its practices.

Assurance of Autonomy

The principle of autonomy in research involving humans refers to the inherent right that every participant have to determine what he or she can do. In fact, it refers to the right that every participant has to select the activities in which to participate. It is tacitly understood that every person enjoys full autonomy whereby the researcher would be expected to explain all aspects of their participants to facilitate their understanding and enable them to make informed and reasonable decisions to participate without being coerced (Babbie, 2016). In the present study, the principle of autonomy will be protected by subjecting the participants to the process of informed consent prior to their participation. This process will require that the researcher provide the prospective participants with a full disclosure on the study intentions, possible risks and benefits, alternatives, and an opportunity to present questions and concerns about the study. This study acknowledges that although there are populations that have a diminished autonomy owing to cognitive deficiencies and impairments, they were not included in the study. As such, there were no considerations for vulnerable population or a need for safeguards to protect autonomy as would be expected if vulnerable populations (such as children) had been included in the study. As a result, the present will make use of the process of informed consent to protect the participants’ autonomy.

Beneficence

The principle of beneficence in research involving humans refers to the researchers’ obligation to maximize the benefits that each individual and community get from participating in the study while minimizing the associated risks. Ideally, a research study should conduct a risks-benefits analysis that includes an honest enumeration of all implications of the study before determining whether or not to proceed with the study based on whether the benefits outweigh the risks and if the risks are acceptable and have been minimized (Creswell, 2013) Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper. The present study has incorporated the principle of beneficence in two aspects. Firstly, the study presents a sound experimental design that is not expected to subject the participants to any atypical harm. The study design compares standard practice against the practice that is considered improved with the intention of speeding up a return to normal daily activities prior to cancer diagnosis and treatment thus ensuring that the design does not expose participants to undue harm. Secondly, the study design will go through arduous scientific and ethical review by the institutional review board (IRB) to ensure that the anticipated benefits exceed the potential harms, and that these harms have been minimized to acceptable levels. Thus, the principle of beneficence will be integrated into the study.

Justice

The principle of justice demands that all participants be offered an equal opportunity to participate, and they should be able to directly benefit from the study results after voluntarily participating. This implies that the principles guards against arbitrary selection without a scientific basis, not benefiting, and coercion (Bryman & Bell, 2015). The present study has adopted measures to ensure that it does not violate the principle of justice. Firstly, all the participants will have the same probability of being selected to participate in the study. That is as long as they meet the inclusion criteria and are not disqualified by the exclusion criteria. Secondly, none of the participants will be coerced or unduly influenced to participate in the study. This will be guaranteed by having them sign informed consent forms and being allowed to withdraw from the study at any point without being penalized. Finally, the study will recruit participants from among the population the study focuses on in terms of demographics to ensure that even as they are exposed to the research burdens, they would also have the opportunity to enjoy the benefits. This is based on the awareness that exporting the study to other populations (whether because of the study risk or any other reason) would imply that the persons who undertake the research burdens do not benefit. Therefore, the principle of justice will be integrated into the study.

Quantitative Study One

Tehrani, A., Farajzadegan, X., Rajabi, F., & Zamani, A. (2011). Belonging to a peer support group enhance the quality of life and adherence rate in patients affected by breast cancer: a non-randomized controlled clinical trial. Journal of Research in Medical Services, 16(5), 658-665. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3214378/

The article presents the results of a quantitative study to evaluate the assertion that peer support groups enhanced quality of life and adherence among breast cancer patients. It acknowledges that meeting someone with similar experiences can be beneficial to breast cancer patients. To verify the assertion, the study compared the effects of education program and peer support on quality of life. Applying a controlled clinical trial approach, the study assigned participants to peer support in the experimental group and routine education program in the control group after which quality of life and adherence were evaluated. The results of the study showed that the vitality and mental health scored were significantly higher in the experimental group when compared to the control group (p<0.001) with no significant differences noted for adherence. The results show that belonging to a peer support group enhances the quality of life Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper.

Type of Study

The article presented the results of a controlled clinical trial. In this case, the participants were assigned to experiment and control groups with all other variables controlled except for the two treatment approaches that were being compared. 68 participants were recruited, all between 20 and 65 years of age, and at either stage II or III of their cancer. Data on quality of life was collected using SF36 questionnaire. The collected data was then subjected to statistical analysis using SPSS software version 18 that conducted Chi square test, paired sample t-test, independent t-test, MANCOVA, Wilcoxon signed rank test, and Kolmo-gorov-Smirnov test. Given that the study sought to compare two treatment interventions, then it can be accepted to have been a clinical trial.

Threats to Internal and External Validity

A review of Tehrani et al. (2011) shows that there were two possible threats to the internal and external validity. The first threat is that any differences noted for the quality of life as the dependent variable were not attributed to the two interventions (peer support group and education program) as the independent variables. This threat was minimized by conducting the study in a controlled environment where all variables remained the same except for the independent variables that were being compared. The second threat is whether the conclusion was based on the collected data. This threat was minimized by aligning the conclusion with the results of the statistical analysis (Creswell, 2013)Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper. In this respect, the study protected both the internal and external validity.

Applicability

The present project intends to show that peer support groups can complement standard medical management approaches to improve the speed with which cancer patients’ resumes normal professional, personal and social life after diagnosis and during treatment. Tehrani et al. (2011) supports the project by showing that offering cancer patients peer support would complement medical management by improving their quality of life.

Quantitative Study Two

Taleghani, F., Babazadeh, S., Mosavi, S., & Tavazohi, H. (2012). The effects of peer support group on promoting quality of life in patients with breast cancer. Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research, 17(2 Suppl1): S125-S130. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3696969/

The article presents the results of a quantitative study to determine the effects of peer support group on promoting quality of life in patients with breast cancer. To determine the effect of support groups, the researchers recruited breast cancer patients from Tehran and Isfahan cities in Iran. Simple random sampling was then applied to assign the participants to control and case groups. The participants in the control group received standard care while those in the case group joined a peer support group in addition to the standard care. Quality of life scores were collected during and at the conclusion of the study. The results showed that although there were no differences in the physical dimensions of quality of life for the two groups, there were statistical differences in the mental and spiritual dimensions of the quality of life for the two groups (p<0.001) with those who attended peer support groups reporting better scores. The results show that breast cancer patients who attended peer support groups in addition to standard care enjoyed a better quality of life when compared to their counterparts who only received standard care.

Type of Study

The article presented the results of a clinical trial. The methodology entailed identifying potential study participants then subjecting them to controlled conditions and treatment plans. In this case, the participants were identified and recruited from the two cities based on the inclusion criteria. Next, the participants were randomized into the control and case groups before those in the case group were subjected to peer support groups that were moderated by volunteers who had received training on the care modalities for breast cancer. The volunteers talked with the participants about their experiences but were not allowed to talk about the medical aspect of treatment. The quality of life scores were periodically recorded for the two groups. In this respect, the study was a clinical trial sought to determine the effectiveness of peer support groups as an intervention.

Threats to Internal and External Validity

A review of Taleghani et al. (2012) shows that there were two possible threats to the internal and external validity. The first threat was that there was a possibility that changes to the dependent variable were not attributed to the independent variable. This threat was minimized by conducting the study in a controlled environment whereby the only difference between the control and case groups was the treatment approach under review. The second threat was whether the study conclusion was correct and based on the collected data. The conclusion was based on the statistical results from the collected data (Creswell, 2013)Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper. As a result, the study protected both the internal and external validity.

Applicability

The project intends to show that peer support groups can complement standard medical management approaches to improve the speed with which cancer patients’ resumes normal professional, personal and social life after diagnosis and during treatment. Taleghani et al. (2012) supports the project by showing that patients who are supported by peer groups enjoyed higher quality of life in addition standard care when compared to their counterparts who only received standard care. This sentiments are aligned with the basis of the project by showing that the effective and constructive communication that takes place in peer groups could address the patients’ spiritual and mental needs (improving quality of life dimensions) thus allowing them to resume their normal professional, personal and social life at a faster pace.

ORDER YOUR PAPER HERE

Qualitative Study One

Ono, M., Tsuyumu, Y., Ota, H. & Okamoto, R. (2017). Subjective evaluation of a peer support program by women with breast cancer: a qualitative study. Jpn J Nurs Sci., 14(1), 38-48. doi: 10.1111/jjns.12134

This is a journal article that reports on the results of a study to determine whether completing peer support programs influence care outcomes for breast cancer patients. Relying on the outcomes of qualitative research methodologies, the study notes that although peer support has some advantages, the also have unique disadvantages. It concludes that the programs have a complementary effect on the support and care provided b medical personnel (Ono et al., 2017).

Type of Study

The article reports on the results of a qualitative study that makes use of a case study approach with the intention of offering an in-depth description of the experiences of breast cancer patients when using peer support programs. In this case, the researchers use semi-structured interviews that are applied to ten breast cancer patients with the intention of collecting their perceptions and opinions concerning their experiences with peer support programs. Once the qualitative data was collected, it was subjected to inductive analysis that noted the recurrent themes within the responses (Ono et al., 2017).

Credibility, Confirmability, Dependability, and Transferability

The results presented in the article can be considered credible in terms of trustworthiness and believability. That is because they are based on actual responses from participants who are most knowledge about the research topic. Having been through peer support groups, the participants can present credible accounts about their experiences. Secondly, the results and discussion are confirmable since they rely on the actual interviews and collected data. In fact, the analysis based on the citations by the participants who present their experiences with the intervention under review. The analysis relies on the synthesis of experiences. Thirdly, the results are dependable since there is very little variations between the individual responses such that they spoke of similar advantages and disadvantages. Finally, the results are transferable to other contexts since the questions are not specific to breast cancer patients so that other cancer patients could use the same results. This means that the results can be applied other cancers and medical conditions (Creswell, 2013; Ono et al., 2017)Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper.

Applicability

The results of the study will be applicable to the current project. That is because they discuss the merits and demerits of peer support programs for breast cancer patients. Using the results from the study, it is possible to develop a peer support program that maximizes benefits while minimizing the disadvantages (Ono et al., 2017).

Qualitative Study Two

Schellekens, M. P. J., Jansen, E. T. M., Willemse, H. H. A., van Laarhoven, H. W. M., Prins, J. B. & Speckens, A. E. M. (2016). A qualitative study on mindfulness-based stress reduction for breast cancer patients: how women experience participating with fellow patients. Support Care Cancer, 24, 1813-1820. doi: 10.1007/s00520-015-2954-8

The article presents the results of a qualitative study to determine how women with breast cancer benefit from participating in peer support groups and some of the impediments to their participation. The study results was intended to present evidence to support the use of peer support groups in the care of breast cancer patients. The study conclusion is that peer support environments are supportive and safe, offering patients a context in which the can connect with other patients with the same problems (Schellekens et al., 2016).

This is a journal article that reports on the results of a study to determine whether completing peer support programs influence care outcomes for breast cancer patients. Relying on the outcomes of qualitative research methodologies, the study notes that although peer support have some advantages, the also have unique disadvantages. It concludes that the programs have a complementary effect on the support and care provided b medical personnel (Schellekens et al., 2016).

Type of Study

The article presents the results of a qualitative study that applied a case study approach with the intention of describing the experiences of breast cancer patients when using peer support groups. The study recruited 40 participants. 37 participants were taken through five focus groups while three participants were subjected to interviews. The methodology subjected the participants to controlled scenarios. It sought to develop a grounded theory, this applied a comparative analysis that related the responses from the different participants before presenting themes that then guided the development of a theory to explain the behavior (Schellekens et al., 2016).

Credibility, Confirmability, Dependability, and Transferability

The study results are credible since they rely on the responses presented by breast cancer patients who were subjected to controlled scenarios. The responses relied on lived experiences. The results were collected from 40 participants with their responses coalesced before presenting a conclusion. These participants are the most informed source of information about the study subject and can be trusted to present credible results. Secondly, the results can be considered conformable since they are based on data collected from primary sources (Creswell, 2013; Schellekens et al., 2016). The same data can be collected by conducting interviews with other groups of participants where they would present their opinion about the intervention. Thirdly, the results are dependable. That is because they present the opinions of participants who underwent the intervention with all of them having comparable experiences and presenting similar responses. Finally, the results can be transferred to other contexts. That is because although the participants all have breast cancer, they are simply talking about their experiences when engaging other patients so that the results are not particular to breast cancer patients and can be generalized for other patient populations. As such, patients with other medical conditions would be expected to report similar results (Creswell, 2013; Schellekens et al., 2016)Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper.

Applicability

The study results are applicable to the present project. In this case, the study is focused on patient experiences when engaging with each other. For that matter, comparable results would be noted for peer support programs applied among cancer patients. The results from the study will be useful in directing the current project, especially in presenting justification for the methodology that should be applied (Creswell, 2013; Schellekens et al., 2016).

Conclusion

One must accept cancer diagnosis and treatment paint grim pictures for patients that disrupt their personal, professional and social lives. Also, one must acknowledge an opportunity to address the disruptions could improve treatment outcomes. The present discussion proposes that offering the patients a chance to hold peer discussions would allow them to share their experiences with a cancer diagnosis and treatment and diagnosis thus allowing them to develop and apply personalized problems that facilitate a speedy recovery.

References

Babbie, E. (2016). The basics of social research (7^th ed.), Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

Bryman, A. & Bell, E. (2015). Business research methods (4^th ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Creswell, J. (2013). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach (4^th ed.), Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Monette, D., Sullivan, T. & DeJong, C. (2013). Applied social research: a tool for human services, Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

Smith, G. (2012). Psychological interventions in mental health nursing. Berkshire: Open University Press.

Taleghani, F., Babazadeh, S., Mozavi, S. & Tavazohi, H. (2012). The effects of peer support group on promoting quality of life in patients with breast cancer. Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research, 17(2 Suppl1), S125–S130.

Thomas, R., Hack, T., Quinlan, E., Tatemichi, S., Towers, A. … & Morrison, R. (2015). Loss, adaptation and new directions: the impact of arm morbidity on leisure activities following breast cancer. Canadian Oncology Nursing Journal, 25(1), 49-59.

Wang, F., Chen, F., Huo, X., Xu, R., Wu, L. … & Lu, C. (2013). A neglected issue on sexual well-being following breast cancer diagnosis and treatment among Chinese women. PLoS ONE, 8(9), e74473.

In an APA format paper, approximately 3-5 pages in length, address the following questions. (Please note that you will continue to write in the same document you completed for part 1, 2, and 3 of this assignment (completed in modules 2, 4, and 6) - you can keep the same cover page, correcting any errors noted on your previous feedback. Please correct your reference page as noted from your previous submission feedback and update it with your new material). In addition, although you are submitting your entire project to date (with revisions), your actual grade will be based only on the current section, as addressed below: Locate two different qualitative studies related to your topic of interest. For help locating the right types of qualitative research articles review these excellent tutorials: How to find qualitative research articles Research versus evidence based practice If you still need help locating quantitative research articles schedule a research appointment with a Rasmussen Librarian; view this tutorial which shows you how to schedule a research appointment. For each study, answer these questions: Give an overview of the study and findings. What type of qualitative study was it (i.e. phenomenology, ethnography, etc.)? How did the authors establish trustworthiness (specifically discuss credibility, confirmability, dependability, and transferability)? Do you think this study will be applicable to your population? Why or why not? Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper

Title of your project

Overview of Work Practice Area

RN to BSN students - Discuss your work practice area here. Are you in long-term or acute care settings? What is the size of your facility? How many beds in your unit? What is the typical patient population? How long do they stay? What is the typical nurse to patient ratio? How many nurses are on per shift? How many nursing assistants are on per shift? What is the role of the supervisor and the manager? Make sure that you are not writing in first person

A-BSN students – Discuss something that is of concern to you in a current clinical setting or something you are interested learning more about in a future clinical experience.

Overview of Topic

What is your topic of interest? Why is it of interest to you? Provide an example if possible of something related to you topic that makes this topic interesting to you.

RN to BSN students – Perhaps you have a high fall rate and are interested in learning ways to help lower the incident of falls. Or maybe you are interested in introducing a new intervention into your practice setting. Maybe you work in the NICU and see a high population of babies born to addicted mothers and want to learn better ways to help those infants.

A-BSN students - You may be going to a critical care area and are interested in learning more about Ventilator Safety. Or maybe you are going to Maternity and are interested in water birth safety compared to c-section or vaginal deliver Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper.

Population

What is the patient population that you are interested in? Be specific about age, gender, etc.

Maternity example – Pregnant women

ICU example – Patients requiring CPR

Infant – Infants with Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome (NAS)

Intervention

What is the intervention you are interested in learning more about?

Maternity example- Water births

ICU example – automated compression delivery machine

Infant – Breastfeeding and use of medication

ORDER YOUR PAPER HERE

Comparison

What are you comparing the new intervention to? Usually you are comparing something new to something that is already in place.

Maternity example – vaginal delivery

ICU example – manual compressions

Infant – use of medication

Outcome

What is the outcome that you are hoping to prove with this new intervention?

Maternity example – Water births are safer and the women experience less pain during delivery.

ICU example – Improved neurologic function

Infant - decrease severity of symptoms within 4 weeks of life

PICO(T) Question

Does the use of water birth improve quality of delivery by decreasing pain during the delivery process compared with vaginal delivery experience?

In patients requiring who suffer VFib arrest, does the use of an automated compression delivery machine compared with manual compressions improve neurologic outcomes?

In infants with NAS, does utilizing methadone and breastfeeding, compared with methadone alone, decrease the severity of symptoms within 4 weeks of life Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper

Principle of Respect

Discuss the ethical principle of respect. How can this be integrated into your project?

Assurance of Autonomy

Discuss the ethical principle of autonomy. How will this be intergrated into your project?

Beneficence

Discuss the ethical principle of beneficence. How will this be intergrated into your project?

Justice

Discuss the ethical principle of justice. How will this be intergrated into your project?

Quantitative Study One

APA formatted reference should be written here

Provide an overview of study one. (Note that quantitative studies provide statistical analysis of data. They are all about the numbers).

Type of Study

Discuss the specific type of quantitative study that was performed. Summarize the information provided in the journal article.

Threats to Internal and External Validity

What are the internal threats to the validity of the study?

What are the external threats to the validity of the study?

Where there any other threats that you thought of that were not mentioned?

How do these threats affect the study validity?

Applicability

Will this study be applicable to your project? Why or why not? Remember that you are not to be writing in first person

Quantitative Study Two

APA formatted reference should be written here

Provide an overview of study one

Type of Study

Discuss the specific type of quantitative study that was performed. Summarize the information provided in the journal article.

Threats to Internal and External Validity

What are the internal threats to the validity of the study?

What are the external threats to the validity of the study?

Where there any other threats that you thought of that were not mentioned?

How do these threats affect the study validity? Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper

Applicability

Will this study be applicable to your project? Why or why not? Remember that you are not to be writing in first person

Qualitative Study One

This is a journal article that reports on the results of a stud to determine whether completing peer support programs influence care outcomes for breast cancer patients. Relying on the outcomes of qualitative research methodologies, the study notes that although peer support have some advantages, the also have unique disadvantages. It concludes that the programs have a complementary effect on the support and care provided b medical personnel.

Type of Study

The article reports on the results of a qualitative study. In this case, the researchers use semi-structured interviews that are applied to ten breast cancer patients with the intention of collecting their perceptions and opinions concerning their experiences with peer support programs. Once the qualitative data was collected, it was subjected to inductive analysis that noted the recurrent themes within the responses.

Credibility, Confirmability, Dependability, and Transferability

The results presented in the article can be considered credible in terms of trustworthiness and believability. That is because they are based on actual responses from participants who are most knowledge about the research topic. Having been through peer support groups, the participants can present credible accounts about their experiences. Secondly, the results and discussion are confirmable since they rely on the actual interviews and collected data. In fact, the analysis based on the citations by the participants. Thirdly, the results are dependable since there is very little variations between the individual responses such that they spoke of similar advantages and disadvantages. Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper Finally, the results are transferable to other contexts since the questions are not specific to breast cancer. This means that the results can be applied other cancers and medical conditions.

Applicability

Qualitative Study Two

Type of Study

The article presents the results of a qualitative study that recruited 40 participants. 37 participants were taken through five focus groups while three participants were subjected to interviews. The methodology subjected the participants to controlled scenarios. It sought to develop a grounded theory, this applied a comparative analysis that related the responses from the different participants before presenting themes that then guided the development of a theory to explain the behavior.

Credibility, Confirmability, Dependability, and Transferability

The study results are credible. In fact, they are trustworthy and believable since they rely on the responses presented by breast cancer patients who were subjected to controlled scenarios. The results were collected from 40 participants with their responses coalesced before presenting a conclusion. These participants are the most informed source of information about the study subject and can be trusted to present credible results. Secondly, the results can be considered conformable since they are based on data collected from primary sources. The same data can be collected by conducting interviews with other groups of participants where they would present their opinion about the intervention. Thirdly, the results are dependable. That is because they present the opinions of participants who underwent the intervention with all of them having comparable experiences and presenting similar responses. Finally, the results can be transferred to other contexts. That is because although the participants all have breast cancer, they are simply talking about their experiences when engaging other patients. As such, patients with other medical conditions would be expected to report similar results.

Applicability

Ranking the Evidence

Quantitative Study I (author(s), year and title)

Utilizing the evidence hierarchy, discuss the type of research conducted and where it falls on the 8 level evidence hierarchy. Be specific. Is it level II evidence (RCT) or is it Level VIII (expert opinion) and what does this level indicate about the evidence? The pyramid can be found in the Module 8 lesson folder, figure 14-11.

Quantitative Study II (author(s), year and title)

Utilizing the evidence hierarchy, discuss the type of research conducted and where it falls on the 8 level evidence hierarchy. Be specific.

Qualitative Study I (author(s), year and title)

Utilizing the evidence hierarchy, discuss the type of research conducted and where it falls on the 8 level evidence hierarchy. Be specific.

Qualtitative Study II (author(s), year and title)

Utilizing the evidence hierarchy, discuss the type of research conducted and where it falls on the 8 level evidence hierarchy. Be specific Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper

Strength of Evidence

Evaluate each article based on the GRADE criteria. Is the strength of the evidence very low, low, moderate or high? Analyze each article individually and then determine the overall strength of the evidence that you have gathered. The GRADE criteria article can be found in the Module 8 assignment folder.

Practice Recommendations

Based upon the research articles that you have reviewed, what are two practice recommendations that you would put into place?

Strength of Recommendations

Once you have decided what you would recommend, you should then evaluate each individual practice recommendation using the GRADE criteria and determine the overall strength of each recommendation.

Key Stakeholders

Who are three key stakeholders and why are they important to your project?

Engagement Strategies

How will you engage the stakeholders? What strategies will you use to get them to help you make your project a success? A work group? A committee?

ORDER NOW

Resistance Strategies

Resistance to change is a frequent occurrence. What can you do to help decrease resistance and improve the success of the project? What interventions can you put into place to improve participation?

Evaluation

How will you evaluate the results of your intervention? Be specific including methods used and timeframe.

References

Appendix A

National Institues of Health Protecting Human Research Participants Certificate

Clinical Problem And PICOT Question Discussion Paper

ORDER YOUR PAPER HERE

ORDER YOUR PAPER HERE

ORDER YOUR PAPER HERE

ORDER YOUR PAPER HERE

ORDER NOW

Login

SING UP STAY TUNED!

Be the 1st to know about news and updates!

Be the 1st to know about
news and updates!