Geschreven door studenten die geslaagd zijn Direct beschikbaar na je betaling Online lezen of als PDF Verkeerd document? Gratis ruilen 4,6 TrustPilot
logo-home
Case uitwerking

NR439 Week 2 Discussion, Search for Literature and Levels of Evidence

Beoordeling
-
Verkocht
-
Pagina's
1
Cijfer
A+
Geüpload op
17-01-2021
Geschreven in
2020/2021

Week 2: Search for Literature & Levels of Evidence 3737 unread replies.9494 replies. 1. Reflect on your practice, & identify a significant nursing clinical issue or change project that you would like to search for evidence in online sources. Formulate searchable, clinical questions in the PICO(T) format for your nursing clinical issue. 2. Next, review the guidelines for the PICOT Assignment due Week 3. Use your PICOT elements to search for one report of a single, original study that has been published within the last 5 years from the CCN Library that is relevant to your nursing clinical issue. 3. Briefly describe how it is relevant to your nursing clinical issue. Remember to give a complete reference to the study. Professor & class, As a nurse working in a pediatric outpatient facility, the issue that I identified is the increase in delays & refusals of vaccination during the last year. Parental noncompliance with immunizations is a public health concern. But what are the reasons behind these refusals? Can education address the parent’s concerns regarding vaccines? Can patient education improve vaccination rates? Is there a relationship between the MMR vaccine & Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)? Concerns regarding vaccinations & the link with chronic diseases & other side effects have increased during the past decades. This negative perception from the parents has been most remarked to the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine as a result of the association with ASD. My PICOT question is: In parents of children between 12 months & 6 years old (P), how does patient education regarding the importance of the MMR vaccination & the unlink relation with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) (I) compared with no education regardless of the parental decision (acceptance/rejection) regarding vaccination (C) improve the MMR vaccination rates (O) in a period of 6 months (T). (P) Population: Parents of children between 12 months & 6 years old. Focus on the scheduled time for MMR vaccination, will give the opportunity to see the perceptions of this parents. (I) Intervention: Patient Education. (C) Comparison: No education. (O) Outcome: Reduced number of vaccine rejection that results in improved immunization rate. (T) Time: 6 months Parental decision-making in the uptake of the MMR vaccination: a systematic review of qualitative literature is the article of my choice. This article is related to my nursing problem because it appraises findings on parental decisions related to immunizations. This systematic review of qualitative studies is pertaining to patient population & is relevant to my nursing problem because the study points at leading causes of rejection from parents including the link with ASD. In order to create an effective education plan as an intervention for the problem, parents concerns need to be addressed first. References: Allan, N., & Harden, J. (2014). Parental decision-making surrounding uptake of the MMR vaccination: A systematic review of the qualitative literature. Journal of Public Health, 1-10. DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdu075Links to an external site. Week 3 Professor & Class, 1. After reviewing the research designs in our text, the quantitative design seems the most appropriate for my research question regarding the use of bed & chair alarms in preventing patient falls. “Quantitative designs are appropriate when the results must reveal the true relationship between a cause & an effect or between two variables” (Houser, 2018, p. 135). This research question is quantitative in nature because it is evaluating a cause & effect between two variables, the cause being the alarms & effect being the prevention of falls. 2. According to our book, samples are taken from a population when conducting a research study (Houser, 2018). A population includes all members of a group that is being studied, whereas a sample is a portion of that population & it’s characteristics. Convenience sampling is a method that relies on members who are conveniently available to participate in the research study. Participants are found wherever you can find them. Face book polls & questions are a good example of convenience sampling (Convenience sampling - Research Methodology).When interoperating studies that use convenience sampling, the reader must keep in mind the potential for bias. The reader might question whether or not the researcher was personally involved in selecting participants, if the sampling was referral or respondent-driven, or if the participants were truly selected at random. “These data may be of the highest quality & quite extensive, but the biases inherent in a convenience sample preclude the legitimate use of powerful inferential tools that are usually associated with a random sample” (Hedt & Pagano, 2011). References: Convenience sampling - Research Methodology. (n.d.). Retrieved from Hedt, B. L., & Pagano, M. (2011). Health indicators: Eliminating bias from convenience sampling estimators. Statistics in Medicine. doi:10.1002/sim.3920 Houser, J. (2018). Nursing research: Reading, using, & creating evidence (4th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Meer zien Lees minder
Instelling
Vak








Oeps! We kunnen je document nu niet laden. Probeer het nog eens of neem contact op met support.

Geschreven voor

Instelling
Vak

Documentinformatie

Geüpload op
17 januari 2021
Aantal pagina's
1
Geschreven in
2020/2021
Type
Case uitwerking
Docent(en)
Professor
Cijfer
A+

Onderwerpen

€8,86
Krijg toegang tot het volledige document:

Verkeerd document? Gratis ruilen Binnen 14 dagen na aankoop en voor het downloaden kun je een ander document kiezen. Je kunt het bedrag gewoon opnieuw besteden.
Geschreven door studenten die geslaagd zijn
Direct beschikbaar na je betaling
Online lezen of als PDF


Ook beschikbaar in voordeelbundel

Maak kennis met de verkoper

Seller avatar
De reputatie van een verkoper is gebaseerd op het aantal documenten dat iemand tegen betaling verkocht heeft en de beoordelingen die voor die items ontvangen zijn. Er zijn drie niveau’s te onderscheiden: brons, zilver en goud. Hoe beter de reputatie, hoe meer de kwaliteit van zijn of haar werk te vertrouwen is.
Kaycie Chamberlain College Nursing
Volgen Je moet ingelogd zijn om studenten of vakken te kunnen volgen
Verkocht
16
Lid sinds
5 jaar
Aantal volgers
15
Documenten
426
Laatst verkocht
10 maanden geleden

4,0

3 beoordelingen

5
1
4
1
3
1
2
0
1
0

Recent door jou bekeken

Waarom studenten kiezen voor Stuvia

Gemaakt door medestudenten, geverifieerd door reviews

Kwaliteit die je kunt vertrouwen: geschreven door studenten die slaagden en beoordeeld door anderen die dit document gebruikten.

Niet tevreden? Kies een ander document

Geen zorgen! Je kunt voor hetzelfde geld direct een ander document kiezen dat beter past bij wat je zoekt.

Betaal zoals je wilt, start meteen met leren

Geen abonnement, geen verplichtingen. Betaal zoals je gewend bent via iDeal of creditcard en download je PDF-document meteen.

Student with book image

“Gekocht, gedownload en geslaagd. Zo makkelijk kan het dus zijn.”

Alisha Student

Bezig met je bronvermelding?

Maak nauwkeurige citaten in APA, MLA en Harvard met onze gratis bronnengenerator.

Bezig met je bronvermelding?

Veelgestelde vragen