NR 503 Week 3: Discussion- Current Event
NR 503 Week 3: Discussion- Current Event
For this week’s discussion, I will focus on an epidemiological study published in 2018 by
Osei-Yeboah, Lokpo, Ussher, Orish, Hamid, Dakorah and Adigbli. The objective of this study
was to compare the estimation of the burden and trends (2012–2016) of Human
Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and syphilis infections by the national Sentinel Survey vis-a-vis
the use of population-based studies at a single urban site in Ho, the Volta Region of Ghana. With
respect to the study design, the authors adopted a retrospective study design to prospectively
analyze 4,180 blood donors that visited the Ho Municipal hospital from January 2012 to
December 2016. In addition, a respective design was used to study about 2,452 pregnant
women recruited from annual HIV survey during the same period.
A respective study design uses existing information, especially medical records and
interviews with patient known to have a certain disease. In this case, Osei-Yeboah et al. (2018)
used published reports from the annual HIV national Sentinel Survey to collect reports of
syphilis and HIV epidemiology. The study demonstrated that HIV and syphilis are prevalent
population-based survey at 4.78% and 2.58%. On the other hand, the epidemiology of HIV was
2.75% while that of syphilis was 0.24%. Furthermore, the prevalence of syphilis and HIV was
higher in the general population than in pregnant women. Even though this article is a medical
This week we will explore current events related to epidemiology. You will present a scientific article to the class. Please focus on interpreting the research question, methodology, results, and conclusions from a sample of peer-reviewed scientific literature. Please be sure the article is related to epidemiology, summarizing its contents for the class, and providing a succinct written summary. Current events must have been published within the last six months. Written summaries should include:
- State the objectives of the study
- Summarize the study design and findings
- Provide a reference of the article
- Provide your opinion on how the “average” reader will respond to the article. Will the article influence decision making or thinking? Does the article leave out any important information?
As future APNs, you will need to be able to identify best practices, which will include evaluating and incorporating published research into your practice.
I’ve listed below some guidelines that you may find useful when critiquing research studies.
- Is the title concisely stated?
- Does the title convey the content of the study?
- Statement of the Problem
- Is the problem significant?
- Is the problem clearly and completely formulated?
- Is the general scope of the study adequately presented?
- Is the purpose of the study precisely stated?
- Related Research
- Is previous research related to the study presented?
- Is the cited research relevant to the study presented?
- Is a succinct and meaningful summary presented?
- Hypotheses or Questions
- Are the hypotheses to be tested or the questions to be answered clearly stated?
- Assumptions and Delimitations
- Are the assumptions underlying the study made explicit?
- Are these assumptions reasonable?
- Operational Definitions
- Are essential concepts or terms clearly defined or explained?
- Are the definitions or explanations meaningful?
- Population and Sample
- Are the characteristics of the selected population and sample (size, source, nature, etc.) fully presented?
- Is the sampling method indicated?
- Research, Instruments and/or Apparatus
- Are the techniques employed (e.g. interview, questionnaire, apparatus, tests, etc.) clearly and fully described?
- Are the instruments or techniques appropriate for collecting the data?
- If tests were used, what evidence is presented regarding their rationale, reliability, and validity?
- Is the design or procedure clearly and fully reported?
- Are appropriate statistical methods used in analyzing the data?
- Can the study be replicated?
III. Results and Conclusions
- Are the findings intelligibly reported in textual presentation?
- Are the conclusions logically drawn (i.e. based on the data presented)?
- Are tables and figures used appropriately?
- Are the findings discussed adequately and meaningfully?
- Does the investigator indicate the possible implications of the study?
- Are these implications meaningful?
- Are limitations of the study recognized?
- What are some other limitations that were not mentioned?
- Are any suggestions offered regarding avenues for further research?
- Are these suggestions worthwhile?
- Are the problem and methodology restated?
- Are the major findings, generalizations, implications, and limitations succinctly
- Is the report well organized?
- Is the report well written?
Here’s a link to a good guidance document for critiquing research-
I found an interesting current event article about a recent outbreak of measles in Japan. Japan has been improving vaccination rates
among children, and in 2015, the World Health Organization (WHO) thought that measles was eliminated in the country (Mizumoto, Kobayashi, & Chowell, 2018). After a foreign traveler came to visit, ninety-nine new cases of measles were discovered from March to May 2018, the number peaking around week fifteen (Mizumoto et al., 2018). Measles can appear in two forms. Classic measles presents with fever, maculopapular rash, rhinitis, cough, and conjunctivitis (Mizumoto et al., 2018). Those with modified measles usually do not report with the typical symptoms and is generally due to lower immunity or insufficient vaccines (Mizumoto et al., 2018).
Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NR 503 Week 3: Discussion- Current Event
The objective of the study was to determine vaccination status and compare with age and type of measles. Thirty-three percent of cases were modified measles, most of these being adults (Mizumoto et al., 2018). A real-time epidemiological analysis was conducted, looking at the type of measles, the age of the person affected, and their vaccination status (Mizumoto et al., 2018). Four were infants, twenty-four were between the ages of one to nineteen, and seventy-one were twenty and older (Mizumoto et al., 2018). Of the reported people, only thirty-two percent had been vaccinated, twenty with one dose, ten with two doses, and 2 with unknown doses (Mizumoto et al., 2018). Research shows that vaccinated cases appear to be less contagious compared to those that are unvaccinated (Mizumoto et al., 2018).
NR 503 Week 3: Discussion- Current Event SAMPLE RESPONSE
You did a good job with reviewing and summarizing the article. I read this article too when I tried to choose the topic. It seems like the authors used case-control study designs, not cohort design since the article attempts to understand the causation of disease in this study. According to the lesson from this week (CCN, 2018), a cohort study is observational which means it doesn’t involve specific intervention, treatment, or randomization. The study concluded the article that vaccinated cases appeared to be less contagious than unvaccinated cases with classic meals (Mizumoto, Kobayashi & Chowell, 2018). As a healthcare provider, we have to be up-to-date with the most current evidence to provide the best care. Thus, it’s important to be informed about this kind of outbreak since it’s closely related to the vaccination which can help to prevent and control outbreaks such as the one affecting Okinawa. Enjoyed reading your post. Thank you !
Chamberlain College of Nursing (CCN). Week 3: Lesson. Estimating Risk, Cohort Design, and Chronic Illness. Retrieved from (2018). https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/29191/pages/week-3-lesson?module_item_id=3556896
Mizumoto, K., Kobayashi, T., & Chowell, G. (2018). Transmission potential of modified measles during an outbreak, Japan, March‒May 2018. Euro Surveillance: Bulletin Europeen Sur Les Maladies Transmissibles = European Communicable Disease Bulletin, 23(24), doi:10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2018.23.24.1800239
Leave a Reply