NSE Week 12: Analyzing quantitative data

Unsupported hypothesis

can be used to suggest limitations (weakness) of study

How to read the results section

1. The investigators responded objectively to the results in the discussion of the results.​

2. In the discussion of the results, the investigators interpreted the results, with careful reflection on all aspects of the study that preceded the results.​

3. The data presented are summarized. Only the critical summary numbers for each test are presented. ​

4. The data are condensed both in the written text and through the use of tables and figures. ​

5. Results for the descriptive and inferential statistics for each hypothesis or research question are presented. ​

6. No data should be omitted even if insignificant.​

How to read the discussion section

• Interpretation of results with a careful reflection on all aspects of study​

• -Includes supported and unsupported hypotheses​

• -Limitations of study discussed in terms of the steps of the process (design, sample, data collection procedures). ​

  • might put in another section*

• -How the theoretical framework was supported​

• -How data may suggest additional or previously unrealized relationships​

• Generalizability or inferences from the data are discussed.​

• Recommendations for practice and future research are suggested (see Box 18.2 for examples). ​

When is generalizability limited

when using convenience, non probability sampling

Essential sections of a research report

• intro

• methodology

• results

• discussion

How to know if the amount of information on ethics is sufficient

• the more vulnerable the subjects the more information needed on the ethical process

• how vulnerable are the participants (are they under 18 or children) for the type of study

• if it is just a survey there is not must information needed

Critiquing criteria

• PROBLEM STATEMENT AND PURPOSE​

• REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK​

• HYPOTHESES OR RESEARCH QUESTIONS​

• SAMPLE​

• RESEARCH DESIGN​

• INTERNAL VALIDITY​

• EXTERNAL VALIDITY​

• RESEARCH APPROACH​

• METHODS​

• LEGAL/ETHICAL ISSUES​

• INSTRUMENTS​

• RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY​

• ANALYSIS OF THE DATA​

• CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS​

• APPLICATION AND UTILIZATION ​

Content validity

get expert to verify

Face validity

non experts verify

Threats to internal validity

history, maturation, patient mortality (patient leaving study or dying)

Evidence-Based practice

a problem-solving approach to clinical practice

• Includes: high-quality research, clinical expertise, patient/family input.​

Research Utilization

• Process if using research findings to improve patient care

• Depends on the interests, commitment, and expertise of nurses in all areas.​

• Must be proactive, deliberate, and systematic, addressing the process of adopting innovation.​

• Includes phases of identifying the problem, critical review of the literature, translating findings to practice, implementation, and evaluating the outcome. ​

Evidence informed practice

encompasses research utilization in conjunction with case reports and expert opinion.​

Systemic review

• summation and assessment of quantitative research studies ​

• based on a clearly focused question ​

Systematic and explicit methods to(systematic review):

identify, select, critically appraise, and analyze relevant data​

What statistical methods are used in systematic review

methods such as a meta-analysis may or may not be used to analyze the studies reviewed

Integrative review (systematic review)

a method for searching and integrating literature related to a specific clinical issue without a statistical analysis or a theory synthesis​

Meta analysis

• includes a statistical assessment of the studies reviewed. ​

• treats all the studies as one large data set to obtain a precise estimate of the effect (impact) of the results (outcomes) of the studies in the review.​

• a synthesis of results including confidence intervals, risk of bias for each study, and all outcomes considered​

Systematic review with or without met-analysis

• No synthesis of statistical assessment, Confidence intervals, risk of bias and all outcomes in the review.​