Sample Answer for NURS 8201 Sampling Included After Question
BY DAY 3 OF WEEK 3
Post an explanation of the researchable populations that may be present in your area of practice. Describe which would be most appropriate for use in your research study and explain why. Then, describe the challenges of obtaining a sample from this population. How might you address those challenges? Be specific and provide examples. Be sure to also include the approach you would recommend to collect data from the sample that you described. Provide a rationale for the approach that you choose based on this week’s Learning Resources.
BY DAY 6 OF WEEK 3
Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days in one of the following ways:
- Provide additional strategies for addressing challenges to obtaining a sample from the identified population.
- Suggest a different population that may be appropriate for addressing the research problem.
- Summarize the strengths of the data collection method identified in the post.
- Share any problems or concerns over the identified data collection method.
- Suggest an alternative data collection method and provide your rationale.
Sampling is essential in research to conclude the entire population. While there are many different sampling techniques, choosing the most suitable for the people is crucial. Furthermore, when designing research, accessibility, representativeness, and generalizability should be considered as they may impact sampling. Patients with cardiovascular disease made up an interest, with a particular emphasis on those who had heart failure. Cardiovascular disease is one of the leading causes of death for older patients and is on the rise. If not identified and treated promptly, it can lead to heart failure episodes, recurrent exacerbations, more ER visits and hospital stays, higher healthcare costs, and even death. Individuals suffering from heart failure, particularly those with reduced ejection fractions, frequently encounter intensified episodes of heart failure and require prompt medical intervention. It would be highly beneficial to conduct a research study on this patient population because they experience frequent bouts of heart failure aggravation.
Heart failure is rising and causing significant financial, social, and health costs (Cesaroni et al., 2021). Munir et al. (2017) claim that heart failure is becoming more common in the United States as the population ages. Hospital revenue is lost when patients with exacerbations of heart failure are readmitted. I found out that if a patient experiences worsening heart failure and is readmitted within 30 days of being released from the hospital, the hospital will not be compensated. Karavatas et al. (2018) state that heart failure patients spend $37.2 billion on medical expenses annually.
My research uses a qualitative approach to heart failure patients. I would obtain a collection of quota samples. “Quota sampling collections are taken from research groups that are predetermined by the researcher,” according to Gray et al. (2021). Probability sampling using quotas involves choosing a predetermined number of people from each population subgroup. The benefit of quota sampling is that it guarantees sample representativeness of the population. It is crucial to consider the advantages and disadvantages of each option before choosing which sampling strategy to use. Researching patients experiencing an exacerbation of heart failure would be aided by quota sampling.
Data Collection Approach:
To gather data, I would interview patients and participants. The face-to-face interview with the participants would start at a time and location that works for them. “Semi-structured interviews elicit information pertinent to the topic’s goal of the interview,” according to Gray et al. (2021). Semi-structured interviews enable researchers to improvise and elicit more information from participants, according to Gray et al. (2021).
Challenges of Sample Collection
One of the main challenges in collecting samples from this patient population is sample attrition. The loss or withdrawal of participants before the study’s conclusion is known as attrition (Gray et al., 2021). Due to decay, clinical researchers may face significant challenges because it introduces biases into their experiments, and high attrition rates jeopardize internal and external validity. For people with heart failure who frequently require hospital readmissions as a result of exacerbation episodes, this might be a problem.
Cesaroni, G., Mureddu, G. F., Agabiti, N., Mayer, F., Staoggia, M., Forastiere, F., Latini, R., Masson, S., Davoli, M.,
Boccanelli, A. Sex differences in factors associated with heart failure and diastolic left ventricular dysfunction: A cross–
sectional population-based study. BMC Public Health, 21(1),1–13. https://doi.org1186/s12889-021-10442-3
Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2021). Burns and Grove’s The Practice of Nursing Research: Appraisal, synthesis, and evidence
generation (9th ed). Elsevier.
Karavatas, S. G., Okuniji, P. O., Enwerem, N. M., Fungwe, T. V., Ngwa, J. S., Obisesan, T. O., & Greene, A. Descriptive
characteristics of patients hospitalized with congestive heart failure: A summary. Journal of the National Society of Allied
Health, Fall 2018, 24–29. Accession Number:142657716
Munir, M. B., Sharbaugh, M. S., Thoma, F. W., Nisar, M. U., Kamran, A. S., Althouse, A. D., & Saba, S.Trends in
hospitalization for congestive heart failure,1996-2009. Clinical Cardiology,
A Sample Answer For the Assignment: NURS 8201 WEEK 3 DISCUSSION: SAMPLING
Title: NURS 8201 WEEK 3 DISCUSSION: SAMPLING
In the research study of Nodular Melanoma (NM), two populations present themselves in an Emergency Department (ED) clinical area. The first are patients presenting with skin lesions, and the second are healthcare providers. While skin lesions are rarely an emergency, they often present urgently due to their presentation of pain, infection-like characteristics, non-healing nature, or a patient’s lack of primary care. Likewise, healthcare providers in the ED are frontline workers for anything that enters through their doors. Their recognition and management of various skin conditions is imperative for the success of their patient’s health.
The most appropriate populations for my study are those presenting with skin lesions. These individuals demonstrate self-evaluation, knowledge of an abnormality, and concern for treatment by arriving at a healthcare facility. Direct observation of these patients allows for a real-time comprehensive approach to obtaining a health history discussion, observation, treatment, and education.
With this great opportunity to study this population and question comes several challenges for studying NM within an ED setting. Challenges to patient recruitment, engagement, and data collection can happen at all levels of the process, but even more so in the ED setting (Price et al., 2020). The nature of an emergency department is urgency, limited time, and interrupted care. This inhibits thorough examinations and patient history, including vital information about their skin conditions and predisposing factors.
To address these challenges, various approaches can be appointed. Rapid consultations with dermatologists or other skin specialists through HIPAA secure technology will aid in overcoming this obstacle (Voaklander, 2022). These HIPAA technological methods include phone calls, texts, pages, photos, and videos of skin lesions. ED medical providers can also use quick assessment tools such as algorithms to identify and biopsy potentially harmful NM areas.
The recommended approach for data collection in the research study of NM for individuals seeking care for skin lesions in an ED would be through mixed-method data collection. Patient surveys, gathering information on family history, individual medical history, prior skin lesions, time of onset for current lesion, rationale for currently seeking treatment, understanding of NM, and skin self-examinations would be provided and collected. Additionally, an observational study will be conducted directly observing the interaction of the ED provider with patients presenting with skin lesions. Using both research approaches, two datasets can merge to find a more comprehensible solution (Wasti, 2022). Through this mixed-method approach in the ED setting, valuable insight into predisposing factors and presentations of NM can be obtained to improve early detection and management practices.
Price, D., Edwards, M., Carson-Stevens, A., Cooper, A., Davies, F., Evans, B., Hibbert, P., Hughes, T., Rainer, T., Siriwardena, N. & Edwards, A. (2020). Challenges of recruiting emergency department patients to a qualitative study: A thematic analysis of researchers’ experiences. BMC Medical Research Methodology 20(151). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-01039-2
Voaklander, B., Gaudet, L. A., Kirkland, S. W., Keto-Lambert, D., Villa-Roel, C., & Rowe, B. H. (2022, May 11). Interventions to improve consultations in the emergency department: A systematic review. Academic Emergency Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.14520Links to an external site.
Wasti, S. P., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E. R., Sathian, B., & Banerjee, I. (2022). The growing importance of mixed-methods research in health. Nepal Journal of Epidemiology, 12(1), 1175–1178. https://doi.org/10.3126/nje.v12i1.43633
The research problem from my last week discussion is that many immigrants in the United States of America do not subscribe to believing in mental health due to cultural beliefs and as a result do not seek needed help for their children or themselves. The immigrant population would be my research focus group.
Research involves getting information and analyzing the information carefully before writing up the results. While methods and aims may differ between fields, the overall process of data collection remains largely the same (Bruce, Pope, & Stanistreet, 2018). More so, the method of data analysis will vary according to the method of data collection. My research for example, will be focus group research. In focus group, discussions or interviews are transcribed verbatim and analyzed using various analytical methods such as the grounded theory analysis. Focus groups are less threatening to many research participants and this environment is helpful for participants to discuss perceptions, beliefs, opinions, and thoughts (Adler, Salanterä & Zumstein, 2019). To explore the credibility of my research, my mode of analysis will need to enable a clear exploration of the dialogue between the interviewer and the interviewee.
According to Adler, Salanterä and Zumstein, (2019), focus-group interviews in recent years as a means of qualitative data collection, have gained popularity amongst professionals within the health and social care arena. Despite this popularity, however, focus-group still poses challenges to researchers. First thing to consider is the ethical challenges that might arise. Adler, Salanterä and Zumstein, (2019) noted that ethical considerations in conducting focus groups with youths and parents do not differ from guidelines in other qualitative research. Consent would have to be obtained from participants. Moreover, focus groups need the approval from an institutional review board. That means that the proposal including the details of the study must be submitted for review to ensure that the standards of human subject research are met. The biggest challenges I am anticipating with this focus group is finding participants that will want to participate as some from this population do not believe that mental health is a condition that requires intervention and treatment.
The strategies I intend to use to address data collection in obtaining data samples are to first provide education in such a way that the participant understands the research. More so, I would ensure that the questions are not designed to find fault or blame the participant for their beliefs. Luke and Goodrich (2019) noted that the research question and research design ultimately guide how the focus group is constructed. I would then analyze the data to identify common themes and patterns. Use qualitative research and analysis techniques to interpret the data and extract meaningful findings.
Adler, K., Salanterä, S., & Zumstein,S, M. (2019). Focus Group Interviews in Child, Youth, and Parent Research: An Integrative Literature Review. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919887274Links to an external site.
Bruce, N., Pope, D., & Stanistreet, D. (2018). Quantitative methods for health research :Links to an external site.Links to an external site. A practical interactive guide to epidemiology and statistics (2nd ed.). Wiley.
Luke, M., & Goodrich, K. M. (2019). Focus Group Research: An Intentional Strategy for Applied Group Research? Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 44(2), 77–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/01933922.2019.1603741Links to an external site. ReplyReply to Comment
The insight gained from the research will describe why the problem is happening. Through analysis and synthesis of the data gathered in the research, the insight gained would help connect the dots and provide an additional layer of understanding. The insight gained would necessitates the engagement of the immigrant communities, healthcare providers and school authorities. A way to apply the insight gained from the research is to publish the research findings.
Specific intervention to consider would be to educate the population and emphasis on what MH is. More so, have open section or forum with community leaders where immigrants can speak freely of their experiences and beliefs without being judged. Make MH educational materials available in the simplest terms and in multiple languages.
Given the complexity of cultural competency as a learned skill to be continually developed, the research team must understand that immigrants like any other groups are to be respected and their culture and experiences are not to be minimized or dismissed.
To help protect the participants confidentiality, research team must ensure not to reveal who participated in their study nor link ideas or comments to specific respondents. Kamanzi and Romania (2019) noted that the researcher team has an obligation to ensure that no harm befalls any participant. It is also important that the participants are informed of the limits of confidentiality and of how and when such limits come into play. For example, participant must be informed that the findings in the research could be made public for a better understanding of the research problem.
Kamanzi, A., & Romania, M. (2019). Rethinking confidentiality in qualitative research in the era of big data. American Behavioral Scientist, 63(6), 743–758. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219826222