Examining Methodology and design

User Generated

bzryrgr2

Health Medical

Description

Details:

The DNP must have a basic knowledge of methodology and design. With this knowledge the DNP can identify how methodology and design can be used to evaluate the validity of research studies. This assignment will allow you to describe your understanding of methodology and design while examining external and internal validity of three studies.

General Requirements:

Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:

  • Use at least three additional scholarly research sources published within the last 5 years. Provide citations and references for all sources used.
  • Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
  • 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 Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.

Directions:

Using the Grand Canyon University Library, locate three articles, one quantitative, one qualitative, and one mixed-method related to your DPI topic.

Create a comparison table, using correct APA formatting, to describe the methodology and design used within each article. The table will be provided as an Appendix to the paper.

Write a 1,000 to 1,250 word paper discussing the different methodologies and designs used in each study.

Discuss the external and internal validity issues associated with each methodology and design.

  1. Discuss the external and internal validity issues associated with each methodology and design.
  2. Describe how using a different methodology or design might have been beneficial for each study and describe why.
  3. Summarize the paper.

My DPI PROJECT " IS HOURLY ROUNDING MORE EFFECTIVE THAN BED ALARM IN PREVENTING FALLS AND INJURY IN THE ACUTE CARE SETTING?

PLEASE SEE RUBIC BELOW

Unsatisfactory
0.00%

2
Less than Satisfactory
74.00%

3
Satisfactory
79.00%

4
Good
87.00%

5
Excellent
100.00%

70.0 %Content

10.0 %Comparison Table: A Comparison of Methodology

A comparison of the methodology used in each study is not included.

A comparison of the methodology used in each study is incomplete or incorrect

A comparison of the methodology used in each study is included but lacks detail.

A comparison of the methodology used in each study is complete and includes supporting detail.

A comparison of the methodology used in each study is extremely thorough, with substantial supporting detail.

10.0 %Comparison Table: A Comparison of Design

A comparison of the design used in each study is not included.

A comparison of the design used in each study is incomplete or incorrect.

A comparison of the design used in each study is included but lacks detail.

A comparison of the design used in each study is complete and includes supporting detail.

A comparison of the design used in each study is extremely thorough, with substantial supporting detail

15.0 %External and Internal Validity Issues

A description of the external and internal validity issues associated with each methodology and design is not included.

A description of the external and internal validity issues associated with each methodology and design is incomplete or incorrect.

A description of the external and internal validity issues associated with each methodology and design is included but lacks supporting detail.

A description of the external and internal validity issues associated with each methodology and design is complete and includes supporting detail.

A description of the external and internal validity issues associated with each methodology and design is extremely thorough, with substantial supporting detail.

15.0 %Methodology and Design Benefits

A description of how a different methodology or design might have been beneficial for each study is not included.

A description of how a different methodology or design might have been beneficial for each study is incomplete or incorrect.

A description of how a different methodology or design might have been beneficial for each study is included but lacks supporting detail

A description of how a different methodology or design might have been beneficial for each study is complete and includes supporting detail.

A description of how a different methodology or design might have been beneficial for each study is extremely thorough, with substantial supporting detail.

15.0 %Summary

A summary of the paper is not included.

A summary of the paper is incomplete or incorrect.

A summary of the paper is included but lacks supporting detail.

A summary of the paper is complete and includes supporting detail.

A summary of the paper is extremely thorough, with substantial supporting detail.

5.0 %Two Additional Scholarly Research Sources With In-Text Citations

The required elements (two topic-related scholarly research sources and two in-text citations) are not present.

Not all required elements are present. One or more element is missing or included sources are not scholarly research or topic-related.

All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related, but the source and quality of one reference is questionable.

All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related, and obtained from reputable professional sources.

All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related, and obtained from highly respected, professional, original sources.

20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness

7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose

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.

20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness

8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction

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

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness

5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

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) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

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

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

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

10.0 %Format

5.0 %Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

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

Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.

Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present

Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

All format elements are correct.

5.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

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.

100 %Total Weightage

User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

I am sending the final paper shortly

Running head: EXAMINING METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN

Examining Methodology and design

Student’s name:
Institutional affiliation:

1

EXAMINING METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN

2

EXAMINING METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN
DPI Topic: Is hourly rounding more effective than bed alarm in preventing falls and injury in the
acute care setting?
Methodology and design are important elements of any research study. These two form
the backbone of the research since they direct and control the researcher to ensure that the
researcher gets the most accurate and reliable findings and results. Failure to adhere to the tenets
of the research methodology and design as required by preset guidelines can easily disqualify a
research from being reliable or credible. There is thus need, for researchers to select the best
methodology and design in accordance to the nature of their research and the needs of the
research and adhere to the set regulations and procedures of the methodology or design. This
essay highlights the research methodologies and designs used in three studies, and evaluates
them as to whether the researchers selected the correct one and whether they are used as required
to qualify the research as credible.

EXAMINING METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN
References
Fabry, D. (2014). Hourly rounding: perspectives and perceptions of the frontline nursing staff.
Journal of Nursing Management , 200–210.
Flowers, K., Wright, K., Langdon, R., McIlwrath, M., & Wainwright, C. (2016). Intentional
rounding: facilitators, benefits and barriers. Journal of Clinical Nursing , 1346–1355.
Mitchell, M. D., Lavenberg, J. G., Trotta, R., & Umscheid, C. A. (2015). Hourly Rounding to
Improve Nursing Responsiveness: A Systematic Review . Journal of Medical
Administration , 462–472.

3

EXAMINING METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN

4

Appendix
Evaluation

Fabry, D. (2014). Hourly

Flowers, K., Wright, K.,

Mitchell, M. D., Lavenberg, J.

elements

rounding: perspectives

Langdon, R., McIlwrath, M.,

G., Trotta, R., & Umscheid, C.

and perceptions of the

& Wainwright, C. (2016).

A. (2015). Hourly Rounding to

frontline nursing staff.

Intentional rounding:

Improve Nursing

Journal of Nursing

facilitators, benefits and

Responsiveness: A Systematic

Management , 200–210.

barriers. Journal of Clinical

Review . Journal of Medical

Nursing , 1346–1355.

Administration , 462–472.

External

This research used the

This research uses the

This research uses the mixed

and internal

quantitative research

qualitative research

methods research methodology.

validity

methodology. One of the

methodology. One external

One external validity issue

issues for

external validity issue for

validity issue about this

about this methodology is that it

the

this methodology is that

methodology is that it does not

does not utilize first hand data

methodology it does not offer precise

offer statistical evidence on the

from the field. Relying on other

and accurate findings that frequency, effectiveness and

research data can have errors

point to the quantitative

efficacy of hourly rounding.

since it is not reliable. One

nature of the findings. As

On the other hand, one internal

internal validity issue is that the

such, it is not easy to rely

validity issue is that it uses

grade assessment might not be

on such findings for

very few respondents in the

appropriate for all types of data,

application to other

focus groups - only 15 nurses.

which can hamper the

nursing settings. One

This number is very small to

dependability of the findings.

internal validity issue is

draw universally conclusive

that the data used was

conclusions.

EXAMINING METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN
limited and not wide
enough to offer a bigger
picture of the issue.
External

This research uses

This research uses the

and internal

descriptive design. One

descriptive design. One

validity

of the external validity

external validity issue of this

issues for

issues of this design is

design is that it is based on the

the design

that it is dependent on

effectiveness of the observer

observation, which can

and can be biased with

be biased and not easily

personal opinions. It also lacks

applicable to other

large-scale data that can draw

nursing settings. On the

reliable conclusions. One

other hand, one internal

internal validity issue is that it

validity issue for this

uses few respondents, w...


Anonymous
Really helped me to better understand my coursework. Super recommended.

Studypool
4.7
Indeed
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Similar Content

Related Tags