n224- definitions

Question 1

Quantitative designs:

Timing Limitations

Answer 1

Cross-sectional study:

• single point in time
• least strong to claim causality
• measured through surveys often and pre-existing evidence (ex lab results)

Retrospective:

• looking back in time
• stronger because more than one-time point
• case control studies are often retrospective.

Prospective:

• going forward
• strongest because more than one-time point and measuring before something happens (ie. it wasn’t there then it was)

Question 2

Quantitative design:

Data collection

Answer 2

Self-reported data

Recall bias; retrospective studies

Question 3

Quantitative design:

group limitations

Answer 3

Case control:

• defining the case population is difficult
• RECALL BIAS

Non-randomized groups:
-defining comparison is difficult

Randomized groups:
-considered strongest because differences between groups assumed to be evened out

Question 4

Research capacity vs Research literacy

Answer 4

Research capacity:

• involves primarily the capacity to produce evidence
• involves skills such as searching, interpreting, and appraising evidence, designing a study to answer a research question, and conducting the study including sampling, ethical approval, data collection, analysis, and interpretation

Skills that are required to have research capacity:

• ability to seek, interpret, appraise, and apply research
• ability to review the literature to develop a research problem
• ability to develop study protocols, sample, analyze, and report on findings

Research literacy:

• involves primarily the capacity to use evidence
• is a necessary skill to be able to perform EIP
• involves skills such as searching, interpreting, appraising, and applying evidence to practice

Question 5

grounded theory

Ethnography

pheno

Question 6

Appraising

Answer 6

1. Appraising the SOURCE:
   - What type of source am I reading?
   - When/where published?
   - Is it high-quality e.g., undergone peer review, conducted by credible researchers?
   - Is there any reason to suspect that researcher bias could affect the study e.g., through a conflict of interest?
   - Who funded the study? Does it pose a conflict of interest?
   - How does it read? Logical; over-under detailed; biased?
2. Appraising the LITERATURE REVIEW:
   Quantity
   -Does the literature review describe research findings from a variety of researchers, over time, and in broad and specific relation to the topic?
   •
   Quality
   -Are the sources included in the literature review high quality? [consider if they are scholarly and hierarchy of evidence]
   -Does the literature review read as objective e.g., having considered the breadth of literature and issues surrounding a topic?
   -Do the authors integrate the research they are reviewing or does it read as merely a list of evidence on the topic; it should synthesize the literature (usually if it doesn’t do this well the argument as to why the research needs to be done is not clear)
   -Does it clearly identify a knowledge gap and justify the need for the research study?
3. Appraising the RESEARCH QUESTION

• Is it easy to identify the purpose of the study?
  Is the research question stated up front? Is the question answered by the study?
  -Is the research question going to help address the knowledge gap? Or does it seem to just be replicating what other researchers have done? What is new about this study?
  Is this research problem relevant and important for nursing practice?

4. Appraising the DATA, in particular the SAMPLE:

-Who participated in the study?
-In what ways did the recruitment strategies limit who participated?
-Did enough people participate to answer the research question? [different for qualitative sample size lower, though quantitative higher sample preferred generally]
-Were people sampled who could contribute meaningfully to answer the research question?
-What biases are present in the sample?
o Look at demographic table; is the study population disproportionately represented? e.g., mostly high income, employed, female sex
o How do the sample biases affect the application of the study findings? i.e., can they only be applied to certain practice areas, particular communities?
-What do the authors identify as sample limitations?

5. Appraising the METHODS and RESULTS:

Do the methods chosen seem to be useful to help collect data that can answer the research question?
Did the authors clearly explain the data collection study procedures? i.e., what they did to get participant data?
Is there evidence of ethics approval?
Do the results answer the research question?

6. Appraising the DISCUSSION

Do the authors link the findings to the literature and explain ways the findings support or differ (or offer new findings) than previous literature?
o

Do the authors identify what future research should be conducted?
o

Do the authors describe the limitations of the study?
o
Have the researchers overgeneralized the application of the study findings?
o

Question 7

Appraising

Answer 7

1. Appraising the SOURCE:

• What type of source am I reading?
• When/where published?
• Is it high-quality e.g., undergone peer review, conducted by credible researchers?
• Is there any reason to suspect that researcher bias could affect the study e.g., through a conflict of interest?
• Who funded the study? Does it pose a conflict of interest?
• How does it read? Logical; over-under detailed; biased?

2. Appraising the LITERATURE REVIEW:
   Quantity
   -Does the literature review describe research findings from a variety of researchers, over time, and in broad and specific relation to the topic?
   •
   Quality
   -Are the sources included in the literature review high quality? [consider if they are scholarly and hierarchy of evidence]
   -Does the literature review read as objective e.g., having considered the breadth of literature and issues surrounding a topic?
   -Do the authors integrate the research they are reviewing or does it read as merely a list of evidence on the topic; it should synthesize the literature (usually if it doesn’t do this well the argument as to why the research needs to be done is not clear)
   -Does it clearly identify a knowledge gap and justify the need for the research study?
3. Appraising the RESEARCH QUESTION

• Is it easy to identify the purpose of the study?
  Is the research question stated up front? Is the question answered by the study?
  -Is the research question going to help address the knowledge gap? Or does it seem to just be replicating what other researchers have done? What is new about this study?
  Is this research problem relevant and important for nursing practice?

4. Appraising the DATA, in particular the SAMPLE:

• Who participated in the study?
• In what ways did the recruitment strategies limit who participated?
• Did enough people participate to answer the research question? [different for qualitative sample size lower, though quantitative higher sample preferred generally]
• Were people sampled who could contribute meaningfully to answer the research question?
• What biases are present in the sample?
• Look at demographic table; is the study population disproportionately represented? e.g., mostly high income, employed, female sex
• How do the sample biases affect the application of the study findings? i.e., can they only be applied to certain practice areas, particular communities?
• What do the authors identify as sample limitations?

5. Appraising the METHODS and RESULTS:

• Do the methods chosen seem to be useful to help collect data that can answer the research question?
• Did the authors clearly explain the data collection study procedures? i.e., what they did to get participant data?
• Is there evidence of ethics approval?
• Do the results answer the research question?

6. Appraising the DISCUSSION

• Do the authors link the findings to the literature and explain ways the findings support or differ (or offer new findings) than previous literature?
• Do the authors identify what future research should be conducted?
• Do the authors describe the limitations of the study?
• Have the researchers overgeneralized the application of the study findings?

Question 8

What distinguishes an experimental design from an observational design?

Answer 8

Manipulation of the environment or exposure (experimental design); observational design does not involve this

Question 9

What would differentiate a quasi-experimental from an experimental study?

Answer 9

Quasi-experimental studies usually rely on natural differences i.e., they are not due to intentional manipulation = therefore, they lack control.

*Quasi-experimental studies also start generally with non-equivalent groups.

Intervention and control groups are not truly randomized  non-equivalent comparison groups – the risk with non-equivalent groups is that you can’t rule out other confounding factors that could also account for the outcome

Question 10

Give an example of a physiological or biological way to collect data

Answer 10

• blood pressure
• temperature
• hormone levels
• labs

Question 11

The aim of good quantitative research design is to rule out competing explanations of what is the cause of the effect.

Answer 11

true

Question 12

A researcher wanted to know whether a resiliency program improved staff morale.
• Which variable is the DV? The IV?

Answer 12

Staff morale (DV)(dependent on resiliency, is the one that changes); resiliency program (IV)(independent)

iv - cause
dv- effect, the variable being explained

Question 13

operationalization of variables:

Answer 13

Researchers provide definitions to specify how variables will be measured and rules to establish how differences in measurement on outcomes will be interpreted

Question 14

recall bias

Answer 14

is a systematic error that occurs when participants do not remember previous events or experiences accurately or omit details: the accuracy and volume of memories may be influenced by subsequent events and experiences. … Pre-existing beliefs may also impact on recall of previous events.

Question 15

reliability and validity:

Answer 15

Reliability is about the consistency of measurement if repeated over and over, and validity is about the accuracy of a measure (tool measured what it said it measures)

Question 16

levels of evidence

Answer 16

Systematic reviews
Randomized controlled trials
Cohort studies
Case-control studies
Case series, case reports
Editorials, expert opinion

Question 17

Uses and purposes of qualitative inquiry

Answer 17

3. to describe a holistic picture of how people with varying experiences experience the phenomenon (research issue)
4. to provide enough information that the findings are transferable to different contexts e.g., you could see how they fit elsewhere
5. to sample people who will provide relevant information on the topic
6. to produce a credible account of participants’ perspectives
7. to reduce bias in how much the researcher influences the findings
8. to represent the participants’ perspectives to the greatest extent possible

Question 18

Phenomenology Grounded theory Ethnography

Answer 18

Phenomenology Grounded theory Ethnography
Type of research question
Purpose
Sampling type and amount
Data collection (Note there are 3 points here)
Analysis
Findings

Question 19

Compare 3 methodologies for qual

Answer 19

Grounded theory:

• what is actually happening in the data?
• How do I?

Hermeneutic Phenomenology:

• reading for understanding,
• what is the meaning
• why this word/expression?
• purpose is to understand the experience of people in a certain category. Pull all the findings of all the people you interviewed and then summarize it as one story that everyone experiences. Ex. developing an understanding of people’s experiences oof loss, asthma, finding out they have cancer etc.

Ethnography:

• what and why are they doing this?
• What artifacts represent their values/beliefs/ways of organizing themselves?
• rooted in anthropology
• they collect artifacts (ex. charting notes)
• not really looking into deeper meaning, just look at the surface level
• they go out into the field, shadow, take notes, observe

Question 20

Compare 3 methodologies for qual

Answer 20

Grounded theory:

• what is actually happening in the data?
• How do I?

Hermeneutic Phenomenology:

• reading for understanding,
• what is the meaning
• why this word/expression?
• purpose is to understand the experience of people in a certain category. Pull all the findings of all the people you interviewed and then summarize it as one story that everyone experiences. Ex. developing an understanding of people’s experiences oof loss, asthma, finding out they have cancer etc.

Ethnography:

• what and why are they doing this?
• What artifacts represent their values/beliefs/ways of organizing themselves?
• rooted in anthropology
• they collect artifacts (ex. charting notes)
• not really looking into deeper meaning, just look at the surface level
• they go out into the field, shadow, take notes, observe

Question 21

Compare 3 methodologies for qual

Answer 21

Grounded theory:

• what is actually happening in the data?
• How do I?

Hermeneutic Phenomenology:

• reading for understanding,
• what is the meaning
• why this word/expression?
• purpose is to understand the experience of people in a certain category. Pull all the findings of all the people you interviewed and then summarize it as one story that everyone experiences. Ex. developing an understanding of people’s experiences of loss, asthma, finding out they have cancer etc.

Ethnography:

• what and why are they doing this?
• What artifacts represent their values/beliefs/ways of organizing themselves?
• rooted in anthropology
• they collect artifacts (ex. charting notes)
• not really looking into deeper meaning, just look at the surface level
• they go out into the field, shadow, take notes, observe