APA Format & No Plagiarism A completed practice-level logic model outline (table) from the Week 7 Assignment handoutA completed program logic model outline (table) in the Week 7 Assignment Handout2–3 paragraphs that elaborate on your practice-level logic model outline. Describe the activities that would take place in the support group sessions that would address needs and lead to improved outcomes2–3 paragraphs that elaborate on your program-level logic model and address the following:Decisions that would need to be made about characteristics of group membershipGroup activitiesShort- and long-term outcomesWays to measure the outcomesATTACHED FILE APA FORMAT & NO PLAGRISM

Empirical Reasoning Required Resources Read/review the following resources for this activity: Textbook: Chapter 14 Lesson 1, 2 Link (library article): Myopia and Ambient Lighting at Night (Links to an external site.) Link (library article): Myopia and Ambient Night-Time Lighting (Links to an external site.) Link (website): What Are Clinical Trials and Studies? (Links to an external site.) Minimum of 1 scholarly source (in addition to the textbook and noted readings) Introduction As the text points out, causal reasoning is used in clinical studies. As a professional in the health field, you will undoubtedly be referring to cause/effect studies for the rest of your professional life. In this discussion, you are asked to expand and deepen your understanding of clinical studies. In 1999, a study on the causes of myopia appeared in the prestigious journal Nature (Quinn). The study received wide-spread publicity in leading newspapers, such as the New York Times, and on television outlets, such as CBS and CNN. Within a year, another article in Nature followed up the 1999 study (Zadnik et al., 2000). The studies had dramatically different findings. Initial Post Instructions Using what you have learned from the text, as well as any other sources you may find useful (including the website in the Required Resources), analyze and evaluate the methodology of both studies and how methodology affected the differences in how the studies were reported. Reportage of both studies can be found with an Internet search using all of the following terms: <Philadelphia myopia night lights>. Follow-Up Post Instructions Respond to at least two peers or one peer and the instructor. Further the dialogue by providing more information and clarification. Writing Requirements Minimum of 3 posts (1 initial & 2 follow-up) Minimum of 2 sources cited (assigned readings/online lessons and an outside source) APA format for in-text citations and list of references Student Sample:  Hello Class and Professor, To start off, lets take a look at what empirical reasoning is. According to Facione and Gittens, empirical reasoning is defined as "that process of thinking that proceeds from premises describing interpersonally verifiable experiences in order to support or to disconfirm hypothesis, which in turn, are intended to explain and predict phenomena" (2016). In this week's discussion, we are to analyze and evaluate the methodology of both studies on myopia and ambient lighting at night and how methodology affected the differences in how the studies were reported. "Myopia, or short-sightedness, occurs when the image of distant objects, focused by the cornea and lens, falls in front of the retina" (Zadnik et, al. 2000). In the one study, Zadnik and multiple other authors reported that 1220 children around the age of 10.2 years participated in the study. Their reports consisted of the "use of night time lighting and their own refractive status, and the child’s refractive error was measured by cycloplegic autorefraction (Zadnik et, al. 1999). These results were reported by the parents. The findings had shown that there was an association between myopia and night time lighting. The second study done consisted of 479 children, ages 2-16 years, where the parents were asked to complete a questionnaire by a pediatric ophthalmology center. The findings from the questionnaire reported that the percentage of children that had myopia were not associated with night time lighting. Within these two studies, the differences included the age range and the number of children reported in each study. The only similarity to both of these observation studies would be that the parents were involved in the study regarding their children.  References:Facione, P. A., & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Think critically. (3rd) Boston: Pearson.   Quinn, G. E., Shin, C. H., Maguire, M. G. & Stone, R. A. (1999). Myopia and ambient lighting at night. Nature, 399 (6732), 113-114. https://chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mdc&AN=10335839&site=eds-live&scope=site (Links to an external site.) Zadnik, K., Jones, L. A., Irvin, B. C., Kleinstein, R. N., Manny, R. E., Shin, J. A., & Mutti, D. O. (2000). Myopia and ambient night-time lighting. CLEERE study group. Collaborative longitudinal evaluation of ethnicity and refractive error. Nature, 404(6774), 143-144. https://chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login?u...