Health Medical
GCU Quantitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations Rough Draft

Grand Canyon University

Question Description

I’m working on a Nursing question and need guidance to help me study.

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.

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. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.


Research Critique Guidelines – Part II

Use this document to organize your essay. Successful completion of this assignment requires that you provide a rationale, include examples, and reference content from the studies in your responses.

Quantitative Studies

Background

  • Summary of studies. Include problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research question.

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

  • Discuss how these two articles will be used to answer your PICOT question.
  • Describe how the interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in your PICOT question.

Method of Study:

  • State the methods of the two articles you are comparing and describe how they are different.
  • Consider the methods you identified in your chosen articles and state one benefit and one limitation of each method.

Results of Study

  • Summarize the key findings of each study in one or two comprehensive paragraphs.
  • What are the implications of the two studies you chose in nursing practice?

Outcomes Comparison

  • What are the anticipated outcomes for your PICOT question?
  • How do the outcomes of your chosen articles compare to your anticipated outcomes?
Description

Percentage

1: Unsatisfactory

0.00 %

2: Less Than Satisfactory

75.00 %

3: Satisfactory

83.00 %

4: Good

94.00 %

: Excellent

100.00 %

Content

75.0

Quantitative Studies

5.0

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

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

N/A

N/A

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

Background of Study

10.0

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

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

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

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

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

Article Support of Nursing Practice

15.0

Discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is incomplete.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Method of Study

15.0

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

Results of Study

15.0

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

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.

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

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

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

Anticipated Outcomes and Outcomes Comparison

15.0

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

Organization and Effectiveness

15.0

Thesis Development and Purpose

5.0

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

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

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

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

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

Argument Logic and Construction

5.0

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

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.

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

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

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

5.0

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present.

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

Format

10.0

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

5.0

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

All format elements are correct.

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

5.0

Sources are not documented.

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

Total Percentage 100

Student has agreed that all tutoring, explanations, and answers provided by the tutor will be used to help in the learning process and in accordance with Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Final Answer

Attached.

Running head: QUANTIITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE AND ETHICAL CONSIDERATION

Quantitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations
Name
Institution
Date of submission

1

QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE AND ETHICAL CONSIDERATION

2

Background of the study
The purpose of this study is to come up with a quantitative research critique on two
articles. One of the articles is Standardizing the Bedside report to promote Nurse Accountability
and Work Effectiveness by Walsh, Messmer, Hetzler, O’Brien and Winning ham (2018). The
objective of this study was to evaluate different ways of standardizing bedside shift handover so
as to enhance accountability of nurses and work effectiveness.
The other article is Implementation of a Modified Bedside Handoff for a Postpartum Unit
by Wallenhaup, Stephenson, Thomson, Gordon and Nun. The objective of this study was to
explore the effects of implementing a nursing shift handover on patient satisfaction in a
postpartum unit. The findings of the two studies indicated that shift reporting at the bedside
positively affects the quality of nursing and patient satisfaction.
The practice issue that is pointed out is related to patient handoffs in nursing station that
results to a communication breakdown. It has been identified that effective communication
during handing off of patients is a very crucial tool that ensure critical information about the
patient is conveyed to the incoming nurses from the outgoing ones. This consequently enhances
the outcomes of the patients by reducing medication errors. Nevertheless, breakdown in
communication may...

DoctorDickens (9453)
UCLA

Anonymous
The tutor was pretty knowledgeable, efficient and polite. Great service!

Anonymous
Heard about Studypool for a while and finally tried it. Glad I did caus this was really helpful.

Anonymous
Just what I needed… fantastic!

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4