Custom Nursing Writing

NRS 433 Rough Draft Quantitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations Patience

dennis

·

·

SHARE

Latest news

Tags

Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

NRS 433 Rough Draft Quantitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations Patience

NRS 433 Rough Draft Quantitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations Patience 

Write a critical appraisal that demonstrates comprehension of two quantitative research studies. Use the “Research Critique Guidelines – Part II” document to organize your essay. Successful completion of this assignment requires that you provide a rationale, include examples, and reference content from the study in your responses.

Use the practice problem and two quantitative, peer-reviewed research articles you identified in the Topic 1 assignment to complete this assignment.

In a 1,000–1,250 word essay, summarize two quantitative studies, explain the ways in which the findings might be used in nursing practice, and address ethical considerations associated with the conduct of the study.

You are required to cite a minimum of three peer-reviewed sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years, appropriate for the assignment criteria, and relevant to nursing practice.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NRS 433 Rough Draft Quantitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations Patience

NRS 433 Rough Draft Quantitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations Patience 

NRS 433 Rough Draft Quantitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations Patience

Attachments

NRS-433V-RS3-ResearchCritiqueGuidelinesPa

Research Critique Guidelines – Part II

Quantitative Studies

Background

            As noted above, nursing shortage is a critical issue that affects the safety and quality of care given to patients (Bittner & Bechtel, 2017). Nursing shortage is an issue that affects most of the healthcare organizations in America in the modern world. The American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN) reports that the shortage of nurses in the US is anticipated to rise in the next decade due to the aging of the Baby Boomers. The aging of the Baby Boomers will also imply the increased need for care demands, hence, overburdening the already burden healthcare system due to nursing shortage (Marć et al., 2019). Shortage of nurses in the US is also attributed to the low capacity of nursing schools that do not produce new nurses to meet the increasing demands (Sokhanvar et al., 2018).

Authors have explored the issue of shortage of nurses in their studies. One of the studies that examined the issue of nursing shortage is the one conducted by (Halter, Boiko, et al., 2017). Halter et al., (2017) identified in their study that nursing turnover is a critical factor contributing to the shortage of nurses being experienced in America today. As a result, the aim of their research was to investigate the determinants as well as consequences of staff turnover among adult nurses. The research question that guided their investigation was; what are the determinants and consequences of adult nursing staff turnover? Halter, Pelone et al., (2017) conducted another study to examine evidence-based interventions that can be used to address the issue of nursing shortage by reducing adult nursing turnover. The authors recognized the fact that nursing shortage is preventable by implementing practical interventions that aim at its contributing factors. Therefore, the research question that guided the authors was; what interventions can be embraced to reduce adult nursing turnover?

How do these two articles support the nurse practice issue you chose?

            The articles by Halter, Pelone, et al. (2017) and Halter, Boiko, et al. (2017) answers the PICOT question for my project in a number of ways. Firstly, the article by Halter, Boiko, et al., (2017) answers the PICOT question by providing insights into the determinants of factors that contribute to shortage of nurses and its consequences. The information obtained from the article provides information about the severity and magnitude of the problem of nursing shortage, hence, increasing the need for the exploration of interventions to address the problem. The article by Halter, Pelone, et al., (2017) answers the PICOT question by providing evidence-based interventions that can be adopted to address the issue of nursing shortage. The article examines broad interventions that are applicable to health organizations in addressing the issue of nursing shortage. The article by Halter, Pelone, et al., (2017) provided interventions that are similar to those proposed in my PICOT question. The interventions include the adoption of teamwork approaches in nursing, effective leadership styles, preceptor-based programs, needs-based orientation programs, use of residency programs and expanding the training capacity of nursing education institutions. The two articles used previous studies with a mix of comparison groups comprising of nurses, nursing students, and healthcare leaders and managers. As a result, the comparison groups vary from those in my PICOT question.

Method of Study:

            The studies by Halter, Pelone, et al., (2017) and Halter, Boiko, et al., (2017) were quantitative systematic reviews. The authors reviewed evidences from previous quantitative studies that examined the factors contributing to nursing shortage, including turnover by adult nurses. The quantitative systematic reviews that the authors performed are associated with a number of benefits as well as limitations. The benefits include the fact that they provide highly reliable and accurate data, addresses specific questions or hypothesis, and guides the identification of best practices in nursing. The method is however associated with limitations such as the lack of use of human subjects, using studies with bias, and presenting findings that may not be generalizable to a larger population.

Rough Draft Quantitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations – Rubric

Criteria Description

Quantitative Studies

5. : Excellent

9.5 points

Two articles are presented. Both articles are based on quantitative research.

4. 4: Good

8.93 points

N/A

3. 3: Satisfactory

7.89 points

N/A

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

7.13 points

Two articles are presented. Of the articles presented, only one article is based on quantitative research.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Only one article is presented. Neither of the articles presented use quantitative research.

Criteria Description

Background of Study

5. : Excellent

19 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation.

4. 4: Good

17.86 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation.

3. 3: Satisfactory

15.77 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is partially complete and includes some relevant details and explanation.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

14.25 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is included but lacks relevant details and explanation.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is incomplete.

Criteria Description

Article Support of Nursing Practice

5. : Excellent

28.5 points

A clear discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate strong support in answering the proposed PICOT question. The interventions and comparison groups in the articles strongly compare to those identified in the PICOT question.

4. 4: Good

26.79 points

A discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate support in answering the proposed PICOT question. The interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in the PICOT question. Minor detail or rational is needed for clarity or support.

3. 3: Satisfactory

23.65 points

A general discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate general support in answering the proposed PICOT question. It is unclear how the interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in the PICOT question. Some rational or information is needed.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

21.38 points

A summary of how articles support the PICOT question is presented. It is unclear how the articles can be used to answer the proposed PICOT question. Significant information and detail is required.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is incomplete.

Criteria Description

Method of Study

5. : Excellent

28.5 points

A thorough discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is described in detail. A benefit and a limitation of each method are presented. The discussion demonstrates a solid understanding of research methods.

4. 4: Good

26.79 points

A discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is generally described. A benefit and a limitation of each method are presented. There minor are inaccuracies. Some detail is required for accuracy or clarity.

3. 3: Satisfactory

23.65 points

A general discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is summarized. A benefit and a limitation of each method are summarized. There some inaccuracies or partial omissions. More information is needed.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

21.38 points

A partial summary of the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is incomplete. A benefit and a limitation of each method are omitted or incomplete. There are significant inaccuracies.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Discussion on the method of study for each article is omitted. The comparison of study methods is omitted or incomplete.

Criteria Description

Results of Study

5. : Excellent

28.5 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation.

4. 4: Good

26.79 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation.

3. 3: Satisfactory

23.65 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is generally presented. Overall, the discussion includes some relevant details and explanation.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

21.38 points

A summary of the study results includes findings and implications for nursing practice but lacks relevant details and explanation. There are some omissions or inaccuracies.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is incomplete.

Criteria Description

Anticipated Outcomes and Outcomes Comparison

5. : Excellent

28.5 points

Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are thoroughly discussed. A detailed comparison of research article outcomes to the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT is presented. An explanation of how the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT and those of the current research mentioned compare is presented in detail.

4. 4: Good

26.79 points

Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are discussed. A comparison of research article outcomes to anticipated outcomes of the PICOT is presented. An explanation of how the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT and those of the current research mentioned compare is presented. Some detail is needed for clarity.

3. 3: Satisfactory

23.65 points

Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are summarized. Comparison of research article outcomes to anticipated outcomes is generally presented. More information is needed to fully establish how the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT and those of the current research mentioned compare.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

21.38 points

Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are partially summarized. Comparison of research article outcomes to anticipated outcomes contains omissions of key information. It is unclear how the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT and those of the current research mentioned compare.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are omitted or are unrealistic. Comparison of research article outcomes to anticipated outcomes is incomplete.

Criteria Description

Thesis Development and Purpose

5. : Excellent

9.5 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

4. 4: Good

8.93 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

3. 3: Satisfactory

7.89 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

7.13 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Criteria Description

Argument Logic and Construction

5. : Excellent

9.5 points

Argument is clear and convincing and presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

4. 4: Good

8.93 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

3. 3: Satisfactory

7.89 points

Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

In:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Other news

  • Discussion: Presidential Agendas NURS 6050

    Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy. Discussion: Presidential Agendas NURS 6050 Discussion: Presidential Agendas NURS 6050 https://customnursingwriting.com/discussion-presidential-agendas-nurs-6050/ Regardless of political affiliation, every citizen has a stake in healthcare policy decisions. Hence, it is little wonder why healthcare items become such high-profile components of presidential agendas. It is also little […]

  • DQ; What is the difference between research- and evidence-based practice projects?

    Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy. NUR 699 GC Week 1 Discussion 1 What is the difference between research- and evidence-based practice projects? Provide an example of each one and the reason for the difference. Why should nurses be interested in learning about EBP?     Order Now Did […]

  • DQ: What factors must be assessed when critically appraising quantitative studies (e.g., validity, reliability, and applicability)?

    Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy. NUR 699 GC Week 3 Discussion 2 What factors must be assessed when critically appraising quantitative studies (e.g., validity, reliability, and applicability)? Which is the most important? Why? Order Now Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games […]