NRS 493 Name two different methods for evaluating evidence
NRS 493 Name two different methods for evaluating evidence
There are various different methods for evaluating evidence. The two main methods are categorized as quantitative and qualitative methods of evaluating evidence. Quantitative methods involve the use of assessing and collecting data in numerical forms. This includes but is not restricted to calculating standard deviation, mean or average, Mann Whitney tests etc (Quantitative research and analysis: Quantitative methods overview, 2021). This form of data is measurable and is more easily able to use to predict a pattern or finding. Most research and experiments conducted in nursing, research, and other fields involve the collection of quantitative data and quantitative methods of research because it is more reliable and straight forward than qualitative tests. Qualitative methods and analyze data based on qualitative categories such as experiences, perceptions, observations, and processes rather than numerical data that shows cause and effect. This type of methos is useful when trying to find a correlation and especially important between a physician and patients. The patient presents qualitative data like how they’re feeling, where the pain is from, and what type of pain they are in along with other symptoms they are experiencing so that the physician can use these qualitative data points to match the disease that is typically linked with the symptoms that the patient is also exhibiting. Whereas, in the context of a patient and physician, the patients reporting of how many times they have went to the restroom, their caloric intake, and other information like weight, height, body mass index, blood pressure, heart rate etc. are all forms of quantitative data. The pros of qualitative research are that it allows for flexibility and creativity because the scope of the project is continuously changing as more data is collected. While there are benefits, cons of qualitative research include the fact that they are very open to interpretation and therefore very subjective. This allows for a greater amount of bias which includes participant bias and researcher bias which will compromise the reliability and accuracy of the experiment as a whole. Qualitative research is also conducted on smaller sample sizes because data collection is usually longer and more tedious with more costs. As for quantitative research, pros include the fact that data is objective, and bias is much more limited than in qualitative studies. Data collected from quantitative methods can also be collected a lot easier and communicated through data sheets, statistics, charts, and graphs which make it simpler to follow. Unlike qualitative data, new technology and software systems can easily compute data and manipulate it to isolated variables that the researcher is looking for to find a cause and effect. While there are benefits, the cons of quantitative research include that it is very restrictive and there is one clear answer rather than participants being allowed to elaborate on their answers for more context. Furthermore, analysis of statistics gathered in quantitative research calls for a much larger pool of participants. Both qualitative and quantitative research seek to find correlations in the collected data and both are significant in disproving existing theories, creating new ones, and elaborating on ones that already exist (Hoover, 2021).
Hoover, L. (2021). What is qualitative vs. Quantitative Study? GCU. Retrieved May 7, 2022, from https://www.gcu.edu/blog/doctoral-journey/what-qualitative-vs-quantitative-study
Quantitative research and analysis: Quantitative methods overview. LibGuides. (2021). Retrieved May 7, 2022, from https://lib-guides.letu.edu/quantresearch
There are two main venues of research to assess information and/or data to in-turn be utilized to benefit the medical (or any) field and for the ultimate benefit of the patients and communities served. Quantitative, utilizes QUANTITIES: numbers, measurements, comparisons and may “include studies such as clinical trials, cohort studies and systematic reviews” per. Chambers and Cowdell (2021). Quantitative research seeks to answer the “what” yet vital aspect of a way to study. Wuhan, China compared medical data in a quantitative study including Covid-19 positive patients (191 recruited) and a randomly selected control group of 50 healthy persons (Yufei et al., 2020). This quantitative research provided information regarding an assessment of possible Covid-19 pneumonia and looking at the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratios (NLR) and C-reactive protein level (CRP) per Yufei et al., with findings of substantially elevated levels among Covid-19 patients compared to the healthy volunteers control group (2020). Chambers and Cowdell inform us a gold standard of research is considered the randomized controlled trial which looks at a randomly selected group (for example of patients with a particular disease or illness) that is either placed in the intervention group or the control group (2021). The results are reported via the quantitative research data, yet the value of the patient insight is not to be taken lightly and should be added (which would add the vital qualitative research aspect) (Chambers & Cowdell, 2021).
Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS NRS 493 Name two different methods for evaluating evidence:
Qualitative research makes use of words with descriptions, life, color and insight and per Chambers and Cowdell may incorporate interviews and discussion groups to “explore participants’ perspectives” (2021). This venue of research takes into consideration, persons feelings, experiences or beliefs of the “how” and/or the “why” of the question being sought (Chambers & Cowdell, 2021). An example of a qualitative study is a study in Sao Paulo, seeking to gain understanding from health care professionals who provide direct observation treatment for persons with multidrug resistant tuberculosis (MDR TB) and the benefits derived for future medical professionals to have insight of interactions and care for the patients they served in the midst of Covid-19 (Souza et al., 2021).
If a comparison is needed regarding 2 different medications and their effectiveness, Chambers and Cowdell inform us, a quantitative study would provide the needed data; however if seeking to comprehend patients’/persons’ feelings and experiences with the medication ~ a qualitative study would be provided (2021).
Data, numbers and the “what” of research is vital to glean from, yet we must never forget why the data is being researched … it is for the individuals, families and communities we serve and their insight, information and voice is crucial to see the big and full picture and for us as medical professionals to be able to provide optimal and quality patient care. Care to patients.
Chalmers, J., & Cowdell, F. (2021). What Are Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods? A Brief Introduction. Dermatological Nursing, 20(2), 45–48.
Souza, L. L. L., Santos, F. L., dos, Crispim, J. de A., Fiorati, R. C., Dias, S., Bruce, A. T. I, Alves, Y. M. Ramos A.C V., Berra, T. Z., da Costa, F. B. P., Alves, L. S., Monroe, A. A., Fronteria, I. & Arcenio, R. A. (2021). Causes of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis from the perspectives of health providers: challenges and strategies for adherence to treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil. BMS Health Services Research 21(1) 1-10. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-07057-0. PMID: 34592970; PMCID: PMC8483800.
Yufei, Y., Mingli, L., Xuejiao, L., Xuemei, D., Yiming, J., Qin, Q., Hui, S., & Jie, G. (2020). Utility of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and C-reactive protein level for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Scandinavian Journal of Clinical & Laboratory Investigation, 80(7), 536–540. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/00365513.2020.1803587
As qualitative and quantitative studies collect different data, their data collection methods differ considerably. Quantitative studies rely on numerical or measurable data. In contrast, qualitative studies rely on personal accounts or documents that illustrate in detail how people think or respond within society.
Qualitative research methods include gathering and interpreting non-numerical data. The following are some sources of qualitative data:1
- Focus groups
- Personal accounts or papers
- Cultural records
In the course of a qualitative study, the researcher may conduct interviews or focus groups to collect data that is not available in existing documents or records. To allow freedom for varied or unexpected answers, interviews and focus groups may be unstructured or semi-structured.
Hoover, L., (2021)What Is Qualitative vs. Quantitative Study? https://www.gcu.edu/blog/doctoral-journey/what-qualitative-vs-quantitative-study
In nursing research, the evaluation of evidence is a vital aspect when it comes to decision making and the development of evidence. This is because the evaluation of evidence gives rise to the evidence that will aid in the decision making. That said, there are two major ways of evaluating evidence. The first way is the qualitative method. Qualitative evaluation of data occurs when data has been deleted qualitatively through either direct or participant observation, review of literature, focus groups, case studies and interviews (Marston et al., 2020). Qualitative evaluation of data entails exploring and examining. the data collected, comparing and contrasting the ideas and then eventually, interpreting the patterns arising from the data collected. This data is however evaluated using non-numerical methods and thus, some of the strategies that are used are usually thematic evaluation and content evaluation of the data where the data is evaluated based on the themes present, or the content within the sources of data. This model of evaluation has however been associated with certain shortcomings, key among them being that it is purely subjective as it is not statistically grounded. Furthermore, the data generated may be skewed as interpretation relies on the experience of the researcher. However, qualitative evaluation methods have a range of strength as well, including the fact that research topics can be examined in great detail and this arises due to the fact that the interviews are not restricted. to specific questions. Furthermore, as new information emerges qualitative evaluation is flexible and it allows for changes in methodology and direction.
The second mode of evaluation is quantitative methods and these are methods that are hinged on the statistical assessment of data. Here, data is collected and coded in numerical forms and his then paves way for data analysis. This analysis is also conducted quantitatively and this means that the output is in numerical form as well (Smith & Hassan, 2020). Quantitative evaluation of data is usually conducted in certain ways. First, there is the relation of measurement of data scales with variables. For instance, data scales can be used to determine the correlation between data, in addition to potential cause and effect relationships between the data available. On the other hand, the quantitative data may also be used to understand the sample and this is through descriptive statistics (Palinkas et al., 2019). The major shortcoming of this method is that it places extensive focus on numbers because it is limited to the pursuit of concrete and statistical relationships. As a result, researchers may ignore relationships and themes that are broader. Furthermore, qualitative evaluation is inflexible. There is no room for research design and models. As a result, the researcher has to be immensely careful when developing both the mode and the hypothesis, as any mistakes made cannot be adjusted and this will ultimately lead to the invalidation of the data. Finally, quantitative research can be misled and this is because of the assumption that statistical evaluation methods are more credible than observational ones. However, the main strength of this research is that it can be tested and checked, making it easier for other researchers to replicate the data. Furthermore. The methods of analysis are similarly straightforward.
Marston, C., Arjyal, A., Maskey, S., Regmi, S., & Baral, S. (2020). Using qualitative evaluation components to help understand context: case study of a family planning intervention with female community health volunteers (FCHVs) in Nepal. BMC health services research, 20(1), 685. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05466-1
Palinkas, L. A., Mendon, S. J., & Hamilton, A. B. (2019). Innovations in Mixed Methods Evaluations. Annual review of public health, 40, 423–442. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040218-044215
Smith, J. D., & Hasan, M. (2020). Quantitative approaches for the evaluation of implementation research studies. Psychiatry research, 283, 112521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.112521
Evidence-based practice (EBP) is the combination of research evidence, experience, and expertise, patient preferences in the process of performance of care. Clinicians bring up experience and knowledge and patients describe personal beliefs, these two components contribute to valuable research displayed by methodology to develop the best outcome. EBP requires nursing professionals to develop skills in searching the literature and finding guidelines for the application of evidence. Study designs are categorized from case reports to case-control studies, cohort studies, randomized control trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses, which are the most specified study designs, examining multiple validated hypotheses and combining the most reliable results (Samonte et al., 2020). Non-experimental research describes a study that lacks the manipulation of an independent variable, researchers conducting non-experimental study measure variables as they naturally happened. The distinction between non-experimental and experimental research is a significant one as the experimental research provides strong evidence that changes in an independent variable cause difference in a dependent variable; non-experimental research cannot provide this evidence and it is used in cases where the experimental study is not able to be evidenced. Experimental research is evidenced when the researcher has a specific research question or hypothesis regarding a correlation between two variables and it’s feasible and ethical to manipulate the independent variable. Thus, the non-experimental study is approached when these aspects are not met. Non-experimental research is performed when the research question or hypothesis is related to a single variable rather than two variables, the research question approaches a non-causal relationship between variables. The difference between these two types of methods of evaluating evidence is dictated by the nature of the research question. When the goal of the research question is to explain a nursing aspect and the research questions pertain to a causal relationship, the experimental evidence is approached. If the goal of the science is to describe or predict a non-experimental approach is evidenced. The two pieces of evidence can be used to address the same research question. The non-experimental study encompasses correlational research and observational research; correlational type is considered non-experimental because emphasizes the statistical relationship between two variables but does not incorporate the manipulation of an independent variable; observational type focuses on making observations of behavior in a natural setting without manipulation (Jhangiani, 2019). A quantitative non-experimental study explored students’ perceptions of faculty responses following medication errors that students perform while advancing through a four-year BN Program. The objective of the study is to determine factors which increase the likelihood of nursing students reporting medication discrepancies. The predisposition factors of medication errors are human factors (knowledge deficit, failure to follow procedure) and system factors (patient acuity, level of workload). Consistent reporting of medication errors is mandatory to maintain patient safety. Nursing students even though supervised by clinical instructors are predisposed to perform a high number of medical errors. The study evidenced that 30 % of nursing students made at least one error during the program of study and the average number of medication errors recalled per student was 1.93. The reporting of medication errors cannot be underestimated. Nurses must take all actions necessary to minimize patient safety incidents. Nursing education programs inspire ethical and moral standards in nursing students, advocating for patient safety being not only a mandate but also a moral and ethical requirement (Walsh, Anstey, Tracey, 2018).
Jhangiani, R. S. (2019, August 1). Overview of Non-Experimental Research – Research Methods in Psychology. Pressbooks. https://kpu.pressbooks.pub/psychmethods4e/chapter/overview-of-non-experimental-research/#:%7E:text=Non-experimental%20research%20is%20research%20that%20lacks%20the%20manipulation,naturally%20occur%20%28in%20the%20lab%20or%20real%20world%29.
Samonte et al. (2020). Evidence-based practice (EBP). EBSCO. https://eds-p-ebscohost-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=4&sid=84c20073-3617-413c-9286-74dc7a355eb5%40redis&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#AN=113931151&db=ers
Walsh, Anstey & Tracey. (2018). Student perceptions of faculty feedback following medication errors – A descriptive study. ScienceDirect. https://www-sciencedirect-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/science/article/pii/S1471595318300507?via%3Dihub