1
Rough Draft Quantitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations
, 2
Introduction
Research papers aim to present the most stringent evidence-based standards of
practice that are attainable at any particular moment. It is necessary to undertake an in-depth
review of the research papers to ensure they meet the most demanding requirements. Suppose
professional practice is going to be improved. In such a scenario, evidence needs to be
utilized to rectify hypothetical and competent knowledge and abilities, and the only way to
achieve this is via completing the proper research. This form of study can only be determined
by analyzing the excellence level found in prior research. However, to find the most
trustworthy data, research papers need to be analyzed to establish whether or not they are
relevant to the topic at hand and whether or not they are of adequate quality to be applied. To
answer a PICOT question about whether or not a commitment to cleanliness helps reduce the
risk of ward-collected contamination (HAI) in intensive care inpatients, the following
research debate compares and contrasts two journal articles that use all-encompassing
research methodologies to put oneself in the position of another.
Background of the Study
Most research strongly stresses the relevance of appropriate hand hygiene in
preventing HAI. When this is the case, the emphasis has been on alerting medical staff to
maintain proper levels of hand hygiene while avoiding patient contact. The genesis of the
issue is that patients and medical professionals are present in venues linked with health care.
The research intended to evaluate the influence that educating patients to practice adequate
hand hygiene would have on the incidence of microbiological infections. On the other hand,
some professionals say that multidrug-resistant organisms have become a source of alarm in
the healthcare business since it may be tough to remove these organisms after an established
Rough Draft Quantitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations
, 2
Introduction
Research papers aim to present the most stringent evidence-based standards of
practice that are attainable at any particular moment. It is necessary to undertake an in-depth
review of the research papers to ensure they meet the most demanding requirements. Suppose
professional practice is going to be improved. In such a scenario, evidence needs to be
utilized to rectify hypothetical and competent knowledge and abilities, and the only way to
achieve this is via completing the proper research. This form of study can only be determined
by analyzing the excellence level found in prior research. However, to find the most
trustworthy data, research papers need to be analyzed to establish whether or not they are
relevant to the topic at hand and whether or not they are of adequate quality to be applied. To
answer a PICOT question about whether or not a commitment to cleanliness helps reduce the
risk of ward-collected contamination (HAI) in intensive care inpatients, the following
research debate compares and contrasts two journal articles that use all-encompassing
research methodologies to put oneself in the position of another.
Background of the Study
Most research strongly stresses the relevance of appropriate hand hygiene in
preventing HAI. When this is the case, the emphasis has been on alerting medical staff to
maintain proper levels of hand hygiene while avoiding patient contact. The genesis of the
issue is that patients and medical professionals are present in venues linked with health care.
The research intended to evaluate the influence that educating patients to practice adequate
hand hygiene would have on the incidence of microbiological infections. On the other hand,
some professionals say that multidrug-resistant organisms have become a source of alarm in
the healthcare business since it may be tough to remove these organisms after an established
