NSG6101 WEEK 10 KNOWLEDGE CHECK QUIZ / NSG 6101 WEEK 10 KNOWLEDGE CHECK QUIZ (LATEST-2021): NURSING RESEARCH METHODS: SOUTH UNIVERSITY |100% CORRECT ANSWERS, DOWNLOAD TO SCORE “A”|

NSG6101 WEEK 10 KNOWLEDGE CHECK QUIZ / NSG 6101 WEEK 10 KNOWLEDGE CHECK QUIZ (LATEST-2021): NURSING RESEARCH METHODS: SOUTH UNIVERSITY |100% CORRECT ANSWERS, DOWNLOAD TO SCORE “A”| NSG 6101 Week 10 Knowledge Check Question 1 (1 point) When a researcher obtains significant results that are opposite to what was originally hypothesized, it is likely that this occurred because of: Question 1 options: Inadequate sample size Unreliable data collection instruments A flawed statistical analysis Faulty reasoning Question 2 (1 point) Which of the following strategies for utilization is most amenable to adoption by nursing students and clinical nurses? Question 2 options: . Preparing integrative reviews Replicating research studies Making presentations at nursing conferences Reading professional journals widely and critically Question 3 (1 point) An assessment of the implementation potential of a nursing innovation includes which of the following activities? Question 3 options: Assessment of clinical relevance Assessment of likely costs and benefits Assessment of the study's generalizability Assessment of the scientific merit of the study Question 4 (1 point) If a finding reported in the research literature is judged not to be clinically relevant, the next step would be to Question 4 options: Search for another topic in the research literature Evaluate the scientific merit of the studies in which similar findings were obtained Assess the transferability of the findings to a new setting Determine the costs and benefits of implementing the innovation Question 5 (1 point) Researchers can improve the prospects for utilization by doing all of the following except: Question 5 options: Conducting high-quality, methodologically sound studies Disseminating results to a broad audience Offering clinical nurses resource support for a utilization project Discussing the clinical implications of their study results in their research reports