Heres discussion 2

Running head: METHODS OF EVALUATING EVIDENCE

Methods of Evaluating Evidence
Details
Name
Institutional Affiliation
Date

1

METHODS OF EVALUATING EVIDENCE

2

Methods of evaluating evidence; comparison and contrast
Evidence evaluation has two distinct methods, and they are qualitative and quantitative
methods.
Comparison and contrast of the methods
Both quantitative and qualitative methods focus on the purpose and effectiveness of
evidence. In healthcare practice, the evidence is supposed to meet the goal and significance in
addressing the essential requirements (Flemming et al., 2018). Quantitative and qualitative
methods focus on the purpose and effectiveness attributes of the various evidence.
Both quantitative and qualitative evaluation methods focus on precision and the
objectives of the evidence (Flemming et al., 2018). Since the evaluation aims to measure the
purposes and accuracy, quantitative and qualitative methods employ the right criteria to
determine whether the articles' goals are on the right track (Flemming et al., 2018). Evidence in
nursing and healthcare must be sorted to be within the scope and required deliverables. Both
qualitative and quantitative methods focus on precision before other attributes to appropriately
establish the required metrics' effectiveness and critical issues.
The contrast is that quantitative methods of evidence evaluation mainly focus on
assessing data and measurable attributes, while qualitative methods focus majorly on
experiences, perceptions, and meanings of the evidence (De Baets et al., 2018). Quantitative
methods of evaluation concentrate mostly on the measurable data in the evidence that is useful
for concluding specific attributes and critical features. On the other hand, qualitative methods of
evidence evaluation emphasize the fundamental aspects such as experiences, the subjects’
perceptions, and meanings determined based on the deliverable concepts effectively (De Baets et
al., 2018).

METHODS OF EVALUATING EVIDENCE

3

References
De Baets, S., Calders, P., Schalley, N., Vermeulen, K., Vertriest, S., Van Peteghem, L., ... & Van
de Velde, D. (2018). Updating the evidence on functional capacity evaluation methods: a
systematic review. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 28(3), 418-428.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10926-017-9734-x
Flemming, K., Booth, A., Hannes, K., Cargo, M., & Noyes, J. (2018). Cochrane Qualitative and
Implementation Methods Group guidance series—paper 6: reporting guidelines for
qualitative, implementation, and process evaluation evidence syntheses. Journal of
Clinical Epidemiology, 97, 79-85.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0895435617313276


Outline for Week 3 DQ2
Methods of evaluating evidence; comparison and contrast
Evidence evaluation has two distinct methods and they are qualitative and quantitative methods.
Comparison and contrast of the methods
● Both quantitative and qualitative methods focus on the purpose and effectiveness of an
evidence.
● Both quantitative and qualitative evaluation methods focus on precision and the objectives of
the evidence.
● The contrast is that quantitative methods of evidence evaluation mainly focus on assessment
of data and measurable attributes while qualitative methods focus majorly on experiences,
perceptions and meanings of the evidence.

References
De Baets, S., Calders, P., Schalley, N., Vermeulen, K., Vertriest, S., Van Peteghem, L., ... & Van
de Velde, D. (2018). Updating the evidence on functional capacity evaluation methods: a
systematic review. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 28(3), 418-428.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10926-017-9734-x
Flemming, K., Booth, A., Hannes, K., Cargo, M., & Noyes, J. (2018). Cochrane Qualitative and
Implementation Methods Group guidance series—paper 6: reporting guidelines for
qualitative, implementation, and process evaluation evidence syntheses. Journal of
Clinical Epidemiology, 97, 79-85.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0895435617313276

Please review :-)

Running head: SUMMARY OF ARTICLES

1

Summary of Articles
Details
Name
Institutional Affiliation
Date

SUMMARY OF ARTICLES

2
Summaries

1. Real-world evaluation of the smoking cessation services in the Rio de Janeiro
municipality, Brazil
The article addresses the evaluation of smoking cessation services available in Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil (Casado & Thuler, 2017). As part of smoking cessation and change programs, the
article is all about real-world evaluation programs and their Brazillian availability. One strength
of the article concerning the practice change of smoking cessation is that they provide adequate
information regarding the services that can stimulate smoking cessation. On the other hand, the
article's weakness is that it does not address the deficiency of smoking cessation materials and
aides' shortage required for smoking cessation. The report may be useful for the practice change
since it addresses the critical smoking cessation services that can help the patients in need.
2. Printed EducationalMMaterials' Impact on Tobacco Cessation Brief Interventions in
CAM Practice
The article addresses the impacts of printed educational materials on tobacco smoking
cessation in complementary and alternative medicine. The article's level of influence is on the
information provided to the smoking addicts, and the change needs tablin...