Quantitive Research

Quantitive Research

Assignment Two (Carol’s extra guide) – quantitative research
Due week 11 (value 60%) 2000 words
The guide is adapted from Polit, DF & Beck, CT 2008. Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice, Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, St. Louis USA
This assignment is designed to help you become critical consumers of evidence based nursing research. For the second assignment you are asked to critically evaluate either a quantitative or a qualitative research report. This assignment uses critical thinking and analytical skills so you will need to set aside plenty of time to do it.
Do not begin the assignment until you have completed the Learning activities and the recommended readings so that you have a basic understanding of quantitative and qualitative research approaches. Refresh your memory about the difference between qualitative and quantitative research and the research method in the selected study.
The steps you need to follow for this assignment are:
1. Select an appropriate evidence-based, peer-reviewed research report (you may select the topic) which is less than five years old. Do not use systematic analyses or mixed methods research (we won’t mark these so the grade will be zero). You can choose whether you want to critique a qualitative or a quantitative study. There are differences in how you go about the critique between the two approaches so it is crucial you get the approach right. Remember you are NOT critiquing the quality of the article but the quality of the research. Choose a study that you are familiar with and one without complex statistical analyses (because you need to be able to analyse the results). You may choose one of the ones you selected for Assignment one. An alternative is to find one that you will need in Semester one.
2. Critique the article (study) using the guidelines in your textbook and the ones provided on Learnline (Chapter 4 of your textbook Critical Appraisal of Research) as well as the readings from Weekly Readings, the PowerPoint and the exemplar. Most textbooks on basic research methods will have similar sections.
Assessment Criteria (this is what we will be looking for)
1. Evidence of appropriate interpretation of the assignment task, i.e. demonstrated ability to critique scholarly literature
2. Demonstration of understanding of the terms used in the selected papers
3. Demonstration of engagement with the literature, reading and unit resources;
4. Attention to structure and logical sequencing of information; clearly identified introduction, body and conclusion;
5. Attention to referencing and acknowledgement of other sources – others’ ideas paraphrased and interpreted rather than directly quoted, correct academic referencing and in-text citation,
6. Written expression: Clear, succinct written expression, using correct spelling, grammar, punctuation and syntax (sentence structure).
Setting the assignment out (if the assignment is inappropriately laid out we may choose not to mark it because it is too time consuming).
• Cover page
• Contents page
• Every page has a header and footer (name, ID and Unit)
• Document saved with NAME ID NUR248 assignment two
• 1.5 line spacing
• 12 point font (Arial or Times Roman)
• Use Page Layout to create top, bottom, left and right margins. (DO NOT use the enter key to create 1.5 spacing because when we download it the formatting gets out of synch.)
• Use Headings for each section (sample, method, results etc)
• Introduction and Conclusion and body of the assignment
• You must use third person (no I’s and We’s and even worse you)
• Reference LIST (CDU Harvard) (on a new page)
• Careful editing and proof reading
• You are assessed on how well you integrate the critique with the literature and other sources. You will need to use texts to define the terms you intend to use for example: Grounded theory is the systematic generation of theory from rigorous research procedures leading to the emergence of conceptual categories (reference.) These concepts/categories are related to each other ……” (Reference). In this study a grounded theory approach explored the steps survivors of the Haitian earthquake took to resolve their immediate family crises. Try not to quote from the book – as soon as we see that we assume that you do not understand and so you have copied from a text and mark accordingly.
• Please do not cite the Learnline materials (they are secondary sources and it also looks as though you haven’t read widely). Apart from research texts you do not need to find other resources/studies.

Body of the assignment
Introduction to the assignment (about 200 words)
Aim of the assignment, what you intend to do (critique) the selected study, state if the researchers chose a qualitative or quantitative approach and what ‘type’ e.g. case study, survey or experimental such as a randomised controlled trial. “The research team conducted a randomised controlled trial (RCT) because an RCT is the most rigorous method of determining whether a cause-effect relationship exists between an intervention and outcome”.
There is NO one way to do the critique (I have adapted this one from Polit and Beck 2008). Your textbook poses slightly different questions as do the articles by Ryan, Coughlin and Cronin (in your weekly readings.
Appraising quantitative research (In all likelihood you will not be able to answer all these questions because of the nature of the method and so don’t feel compelled to answer them all but you must address the main headings). (Most of the ‘words’ in this assignment are divided up under the following headings).

Title (one sentence)
• Is the title a good one, succinctly suggesting key variables and the study population?
Introduction (100 words)
Statement of the problem
• Is the problem stated unambiguously and is it easy to identify?
• Does the problem statement build a cogent and persuasive argument for the new study?
• Does the problem have significance for nursing/midwifery?
• Is there a good match between the research problem on the one hand and the paradigm, tradition, and methods on the other?
Research questions/ hypothesis (50 words) – experimental research has hypotheses rather than research questions
• Are research questions and/or hypotheses explicitly stated? If not, is their absence justified?
• Are the questions and hypotheses appropriately worded, with clear specification of key variables and the study population?
• Are the questions/hypotheses consistent with the literature review and the conceptual framework?
Literature Review
• Is the literature review up to date and based mainly on recent primary sources?
• Does the review provide a state-of-the-art synthesis of evidence on the research problem?
• Does the literature review provide a solid basis for the new study?
Conceptual framework
• Are key concepts adequately defined conceptually?
• Is the philosophical basis, underlying tradition, conceptual framework, or ideological orientation made explicit and is it appropriate for the problem
• In an experimental study an intervention is made under controlled conditions with the sole purpose of evaluating its effect. The gold standard is the ‘Randomised Controlled Trial’ or RCT, most commonly used in clinical trials to assess whether a therapeutic intervention is effective.
• You could say: “Experimental research is conducted mostly in laboratories in the context of basic research (Ref). The principle advantage of experimental designs is that it provides the opportunity to identify cause-and-effect relationships and thus is suited to studies which explore the efficacy of one ‘treatment’ compared to another. In experimental research, the investigator manipulates conditions for the purpose of determining their effect on behaviour (dependent and independent variables). Subjects are randomly allocated to a group and they and the researchers should be unaware of their membership in an experimental group so that they do not act differently (Hawthorne Effect). In the simplest experimental design, investigators administer a placebo to the control group and a treatment to the experimental group so that the only thing that differentiates the two groups is that one has ‘the treatment’ and the other does not (control group)”.
• Non-experimental research e.g., case studies, surveys, correlation studies, are non-manipulative observational research usually conducted in natural settings.
Methods
Protection of participants’ rights
• Were appropriate procedures used to safeguard the rights of study participants? There are considerable issues surrounding obtaining informed consent – minors, dementia, no-English spoken, and illiteracy.
• Was the study subject to external review? (Is there an explicit statement that the study was approved by an Ethics Review Committee)?
• Was the study designed to minimise risks and maximise benefits to participants?

Research design and research tradition
• Was the most rigorous possible design used, given the purpose of the research?
• Did the design minimise biases and threats to the internal and external validity of the study?
• Was the most rigorous possible design used, given the purpose of the research?
• Were appropriate comparisons made to enhance interpret-ability of the findings?
• Was the number of data collection points appropriate?
• Did the design minimise biases and threats to the internal and external validity of the study (e.g., was blinding used, was attrition minimised)?
Sample and Setting
• Was the population identified and described?
• Was the sample described in sufficient detail?
• Was the best possible sampling design used to enhance the sample’s representativeness? (stratified, cluster, snowballing etc)
• Were sample biases minimised?
• Was the sample size adequate? A “good” sample is one that is representative of the population from which it was selected. A power analysis used to estimate sample size needs. Usually the larger the sample in quantitative research the more ‘biases are diluted’.
Data collection
• Are the operational and conceptual definitions congruent?
• Were key variables (independent and dependent) operationalised using the best possible method (e.g., interviews, observations, and so on) and with adequate justification?
• Are the specific instruments adequately described and were they good choices, given the study purpose and study population?
• Does the report provide evidence that the data collection methods yielded data that were high on reliability and validity? (look for correlation coefficients – Cronbach’s alpha coefficient)
Procedures
• If there was an intervention, is it adequately described and was it properly implemented?
• Did most participants allocated to the intervention group actually receive the intervention?
• Was data collected in a manner that minimized bias?
• Was the staff that collected data appropriately trained?
Rigour
• Were methods and measures used to enhance reliability and validity?
Results
Data analysis
• Were appropriate statistical methods used, given the level of measurement of the variables, number of groups being compared, and so on?
• Was the most powerful analytic method used (e.g., did the analysis help to control for confounding variables?
• Were the significance levels, confidence intervals, odd-ratios stated and were results significant? An odds ratio (OR) is a measure of association between an exposure and an outcome. The OR represents the odds that an outcome will occur given a particular exposure, compared to the odds of the outcome occurring in the absence of that exposure to the odds of the outcome occurring in the absence of that exposure. A confidence interval gives an estimated range of values which is likely to include an unknown population parameter, the estimated range being calculated from a given set of sample data.
• In intervention studies, were analyses performed using the intention-to-treat approach?
• Were Type I and Type II errors avoided or minimised?
Findings
• Are the findings adequately summarized, with good use of tables and figures?
• Are findings reported in a manner that facilitates a meta-analysis and with sufficient information needed for evidence-based practice?
Implications
• Do the researchers discuss the implications of the study for clinical practice or further research and are those implications reasonable and complete
Discussion
• Are all major findings interpreted and discussed within the context of prior research and/or the study’s conceptual framework?
• Are the interpretations consistent with the results and with the study’s limitations?
• Does the report address the issue of generalisability of the findings?
Interpretation of the findings
• Are the findings interpreted within an appropriate frame of reference?
• Are major findings interpreted and discussed within the context of prior studies?
• Are the interpretations consistent with the study’s limitations?
• Does the report address the issue of the transferability of the findings?
Implications
• Do the researchers discuss the implications of the study for clinical practice or further inquiry, and are those implications reasonable and complete?
Global Issues
Presentation
• Was the report well written, well organised, and sufficiently detailed for critical analysis?
• Were the descriptions of the methods, findings, and interpretations sufficiently rich and vivid?
• •Was the report well written, well organized, and sufficiently detailed for critical analysis?
• Were the descriptions of the methods, findings, and interpretations sufficiently rich and
Researchers’ credibility
• Do the researchers’ clinical, substantive, or methodological qualifications and experience enhance confidence in the findings and their interpretation?
Summary of the study (150 words)
• Do the study findings appear to be trustworthy and do you have confidence in the truth value of the results?
• Does the study contribute any meaningful evidence that can be used in nursing/midwifery/ social science disciplines and is it useful to the discipline
• Do the researchers discuss the implications of the study for clinical practice or further inquiry, and are those implications reasonable and complete?

Conclusion to the assignment (200 words)
REFERENCE LIST (not references)!
Assignment Two (Carol’s extra guide) – quantitative research
Due week 11 (value 60%) 2000 words
The guide is adapted from Polit, DF & Beck, CT 2008. Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice, Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, St. Louis USA
This assignment is designed to help you become critical consumers of evidence based nursing research. For the second assignment you are asked to critically evaluate either a quantitative or a qualitative research report.This assignment uses critical thinking and analytical skills so you will need to set aside plenty of time to do it.
Do not begin the assignment until you have completed the Learning activities and the recommended readings so that you have a basic understanding of quantitative and qualitative research approaches. Refresh your memory about the difference between qualitative and quantitative research and the research method in the selected study.
The steps you need to follow for this assignment are:
1. Select an appropriate evidence-based, peer-reviewed research report(you may select the topic) which is less than five years old.Do not use systematic analyses or mixed methods research (we won’t mark these so the grade will be zero). You can choose whether you want to critique a qualitative or a quantitative study. There are differences in how you go about the critique between the two approaches so it is crucial you get the approach right. Remember you are NOT critiquing the quality of the article but the quality of the research. Choose a study that you are familiar with and one without complex statistical analyses (because you need to be able to analyse the results). You may choose one of the ones you selected for Assignment one. An alternative is to find one that you will need in Semester one.
2. Critique the article (study) using the guidelines in your textbook and the ones provided on Learnline (Chapter 4 of your textbook Critical Appraisal of Research) as well as the readings from Weekly Readings, the PowerPoint and the exemplar. Most textbooks on basic research methods will have similar sections.
Assessment Criteria (this is what we will be looking for)
1. Evidence of appropriate interpretation of the assignment task, i.e. demonstrated ability tocritique scholarly literature
2. Demonstration of understanding of the terms used in the selected papers
3. Demonstration of engagement with the literature, reading and unit resources;
4. Attention to structure and logical sequencing of information; clearly identified introduction,body and conclusion;
5. Attention to referencing and acknowledgement of other sources – others’ ideas paraphrasedand interpreted rather than directly quoted, correct academic referencing and in-text citation,
6. Written expression: Clear, succinct written expression, using correct spelling, grammar,punctuation and syntax (sentence structure).
Setting the assignment out (if the assignment is inappropriately laid out we may choose not to mark it because it is too time consuming).
• Cover page
• Contents page
• Every page has a header and footer (name, ID and Unit)
• Document saved with NAME ID NUR248 assignment two
• 1.5 line spacing
• 12 point font (Arial or Times Roman)
• Use Page Layout to create top, bottom, left and right margins. (DO NOT use the enter key to create 1.5 spacing because when we download it the formatting gets out of synch.)
• Use Headings for each section (sample, method, results etc)
• Introduction and Conclusion and body of the assignment
• You must use third person (no I’s and We’s and even worse you)
• Reference LIST (CDU Harvard) (on a new page)
• Careful editing and proof reading
• You are assessed on how well you integrate the critique with the literature and other sources. You will need to use texts to define the terms you intend to usefor example: Grounded theory is the systematic generation of theory from rigorous research procedures leading to the emergence of conceptual categories (reference.) These concepts/categories are related to each other ……” (Reference). In this study a grounded theory approach explored the steps survivors of the Haitian earthquake took to resolve their immediate family crises. Try not to quote from the book – as soon as we see that we assume that you do not understand and so you have copied from a text and mark accordingly.
• Please do not cite the Learnline materials (they are secondary sources and it also looks as though you haven’t read widely). Apart from research texts you do not need to find other resources/studies.

Body of the assignment
Introduction to the assignment(about 200 words)
Aim of the assignment, what you intend to do (critique) the selected study, state if the researchers chose a qualitative or quantitative approach and what ‘type’ e.g. case study, survey or experimental such as a randomised controlled trial. “The research team conducted a randomised controlled trial (RCT) because an RCT is the most rigorous method of determining whether a cause-effect relationship exists between an intervention and outcome”.
There is NO one way to do the critique (I have adapted this one from Polit and Beck 2008). Your textbook poses slightly different questions as do the articles by Ryan, Coughlin and Cronin (in your weekly readings.
Appraising quantitative research(In all likelihood you will not be able to answer all these questions because of the nature of the method and so don’t feel compelled to answer them all but you must address the main headings).(Most of the ‘words’ in this assignment are divided up under the following headings).

Title (one sentence)
• Is the title a good one, succinctly suggesting key variables and the study population?
Introduction(100 words)
Statement of the problem
• Is the problem stated unambiguously and is it easy to identify?
• Does the problem statement build a cogent and persuasive argument for the new study?
• Does the problem have significance for nursing/midwifery?
• Is there a good match between the research problem on the one hand and the paradigm, tradition, and methods on the other?
Research questions/ hypothesis (50 words) – experimental research has hypotheses rather than research questions
• Are research questions and/or hypotheses explicitly stated? If not, is their absence justified?
• Are the questions and hypotheses appropriately worded, with clear specification of key variables and the study population?
• Are the questions/hypotheses consistent with the literature review and the conceptual framework?
Literature Review
• Is the literature review up to date and based mainly on recent primarysources?
• Does the review provide a state-of-the-art synthesis of evidence on the research problem?
• Does the literature review provide a solid basis for the new study?
Conceptual framework
• Are key concepts adequately defined conceptually?
• Is the philosophical basis, underlying tradition, conceptual framework, or ideological orientation made explicit and is it appropriate for the problem
• In an experimental study an intervention is made under controlled conditions with the sole purpose of evaluating its effect. The gold standard is the ‘Randomised Controlled Trial’ or RCT, most commonly used in clinical trials to assess whether a therapeutic intervention is effective.
• You could say: “Experimental research is conducted mostly in laboratories in the context of basic research (Ref). The principle advantage of experimental designs is that it provides the opportunity to identify cause-and-effect relationships and thus is suited to studies which explore the efficacy of one ‘treatment’ compared to another. In experimental research, the investigator manipulates conditions for the purpose of determining their effect on behaviour (dependent and independent variables). Subjects are randomly allocated to a group and they and the researchers should be unaware of their membership in an experimental group so that they do not act differently (Hawthorne Effect). In the simplest experimental design, investigators administer a placebo to the control group and a treatment to the experimental group so that the only thing that differentiates the two groups is that one has ‘the treatment’ and the other does not (control group)”.
• Non-experimental research e.g., case studies, surveys, correlation studies, are non-manipulative observational research usually conducted in natural settings.
Methods
Protection of participants’ rights
• Were appropriate procedures used to safeguard the rights of study participants?There are considerable issues surrounding obtaining informed consent – minors, dementia, no-English spoken, and illiteracy.
• Was the study subject to external review? (Is there an explicit statement that the study was approved by an Ethics Review Committee)?
• Was the study designed to minimise risks and maximise benefits to participants?

Research design and research tradition
• Was the most rigorous possible design used, given the purpose of the research?
• Did the design minimise biases and threats to the internal and external validity of the study?
• Was the most rigorous possible design used, given the purpose of the research?
• Were appropriate comparisons made to enhance interpret-ability of the findings?
• Was the number of data collection points appropriate?
• Did the design minimise biases and threats to the internal and external validity of the study (e.g., was blinding used, was attrition minimised)?
Sample and Setting
• Was the population identified and described?
• Was the sample described in sufficient detail?
• Was the best possible sampling design used to enhance the sample’s representativeness? (stratified, cluster, snowballing etc)
• Were sample biases minimised?
• Was the sample size adequate? A “good” sample is one that is representative of the population from which it was selected. Apower analysis used to estimate sample size needs. Usually the larger the sample in quantitative research the more ‘biases are diluted’.
Data collection
• Are the operational and conceptual definitions congruent?
• Were key variables (independent and dependent) operationalised using the best possible method (e.g., interviews, observations, and so on) and with adequate justification?
• Are the specific instruments adequately described and were they good choices, given the study purpose and study population?
• Does the report provide evidence that the data collection methods yielded data that were high on reliability and validity? (look for correlation coefficients – Cronbach’s alpha coefficient)
Procedures
• If there was an intervention, is it adequately described and was it properly implemented?
• Did most participants allocated to the intervention group actually receive the intervention?
• Was data collected in a manner that minimized bias?
• Was the staff that collected data appropriately trained?
Rigour
• Were methods and measures used to enhance reliability and validity?
Results
Data analysis
• Were appropriate statistical methods used, given the level of measurement of the variables, number of groups being compared, and so on?
• Was the most powerful analytic method used (e.g., did the analysis help to control for confounding variables?
• Were the significance levels, confidence intervals, odd-ratios stated and were results significant?An odds ratio (OR) is a measure of association between an exposure and an outcome. The OR represents the odds that an outcome will occur given a particular exposure, compared to the odds of the outcome occurring in the absence of that exposure to the odds of the outcome occurring in the absence of that exposure. A confidence interval gives an estimated range of values which is likely to include an unknown population parameter, the estimated range being calculated from a given set of sample data.
• In intervention studies, were analyses performed using the intention-to-treat approach?
• Were Type I and Type II errors avoided or minimised?
Findings
• Are the findings adequately summarized, with good use of tables and figures?
• Are findings reported in a manner that facilitates a meta-analysis and with sufficient information needed for evidence-based practice?
Implications
• Do the researchers discuss the implications of the study for clinical practice or further research and are those implications reasonable and complete
Discussion
• Are all major findings interpreted and discussed within the context of prior research and/or the study’s conceptual framework?
• Are the interpretations consistent with the results and with the study’s limitations?
• Does the report address the issue of generalisability of the findings?
Interpretation of the findings
• Are the findings interpreted within an appropriate frame of reference?
• Are major findings interpreted and discussed within the context of prior studies?
• Are the interpretations consistent with the study’s limitations?
• Does the report address the issue of the transferability of the findings?
Implications
• Do the researchers discuss the implications of the study for clinical practice or further inquiry, and are those implications reasonable and complete?
Global Issues
Presentation
• Was the report well written, well organised, and sufficiently detailed for critical analysis?
• Were the descriptions of the methods, findings, and interpretations sufficiently rich and vivid?
• •Was the report well written, well organized, and sufficiently detailed for critical analysis?
• Were the descriptions of the methods, findings, and interpretations sufficiently rich and
Researchers’ credibility
• Do the researchers’ clinical, substantive, or methodological qualifications and experience enhance confidence in the findings and their interpretation?
Summary of the study (150 words)
• Do the study findings appear to be trustworthy and do you have confidence in the truth value of the results?
• Does the study contribute any meaningful evidence that can be used in nursing/midwifery/ social science disciplines and is it useful to the discipline
• Do the researchers discuss the implications of the study for clinical practice or further inquiry, and are those implications reasonable and complete?

Conclusion to the assignment (200 words)
REFERENCE LIST (not references)!
ORDER THIS ESSAY HERE NOW AND GET A DISCOUNT !!!

 

You can place an order similar to this with us. You are assured of an authentic custom paper delivered within the given deadline besides our 24/7 customer support all through.

 

[order_calculator]