Discussion: Shared Theory In Palliative Care

Using Fawcett’s framework for theory evaluation (as discussed in Peterson & Bredow, 2016, p. 43), discuss to what extent the selected practice theory or model(see above) meets the criterion of pragmatic adequacy (that is, how well the theory or model can be utilized in real-life situations, particularly clinical practice) by addressing the following:

Evaluate the practice theory or model.
Describe the special education and/or skill training recommended for nurses so that the theory or model can be used in their clinical practice.
Is it possible to derive clinical protocols from the theory or model? If yes, briefly explain. If no, explain why not?
How often has the theory or model been used for nursing research? If it has been used for research, provide a full APA citation for one study example that used this theory or model. If it hasn’t been used, please explain why it hasn’t been used.
Discuss at least two favorable outcomes that result from using this theory or model as a basis for nursing practice
APA Format, at least 3 scholarly articles less than 3 years

ORDER CUSTOM, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER

Fawcett (2000) made the following recommendations to be used for the evaluation of nursing theories. Her criteria include significance, internal consistency, parsimony, testability, empirical adequacy, and pragmatic adequacy. She also recommends that the evaluation of a theory requires judgments to be made about the extent to which a theory satisfies the criteria. Significance may be determined by asking the following questions: Are the metaparadigm concepts and propositions addressed by the theory explicit? In middle range theories, all aspects of the metaparadigm for nursing are not always covered, and that should not detract from its use by nursing researchers. Are the philosophical claims on which the theory is based explicit? Here again, some middle range theories will be devoid of philosophical claims. Is the conceptual model from which the theory was derived explicit? Are the authors of antecedent knowledge from nursing and adjunctive disciplines acknowledged, and are bibliographical citations given? (Fawcett, 2000, p. 504).Fawcett’s second criterion of internal consistency requires that all the elements of the theory be congruent. These elements may include conceptual model and theory concepts and propositions. In addition, Fawcett suggests that semantic clarity and consistency are required for internal consistency to be maintained. She proposes that the following questions be asked when evaluating the internal consistency of a theory: Are the content and the context of the theory congruent? Do the concepts reflect semantic clarity and consistency? Do the theory propositions reflect structural consistency? (Fawcett,2000).Parsimony is concerned with whether the theory is stated clearly and concisely. This criterion is met when the statements clarify rather than obscure the topic of interest. This is as important in middle range theory as it is in grand theory. Even though the scope of the theory may be narrow in a middle range theory, it is still important to be clear and concise in the explanations of the concepts. The goal of theory development in nursing is the empirical testing of interventions that are specified in the form of middle range theories (Fawcett, 2000). The concepts of a middle range theory should be observable and the propositions measurable. Fawcett (2000, p. 506) suggests that the following questions should be asked when evaluating the testability of a middle range theory: Does the research methodology reflect the middle range theory? Are the middle range theory concepts observable through instruments that

Discussion: Shared Theory In Palliative Care

The following analysis exercise will provide the guidance for conducting an evaluation of a middle range theory before selecting it for use in a research study.

MIDDLE RANGE THEORY EVALUATION PROCESS

This evaluation process, to be applied at the end of each subsequent chapter as an intellectual educational exercise, is a synthesis of the works of the authors reviewed in this chapter. After careful review of the theory presented in each chapter, taking into consideration the examples given where the middle range theory is applied in practice and the case study provided, the reader should be able to carry out this theory evaluation, taking into account the following criteria listed here with their definitions. Answer the questions posed for each criterion. Summarize the endings in a concluding paragraph for both internal and external criticism. Finally, make a judgment as to whether this theory could be adapted for use in research. Start the process by evaluating internal criticism.

Internal Criticism

Adequacy:

How completely does the theory address the topics it claims to address? Are there holes or gaps that need to be filled in by other work or further refinement of the theory? Does it account for the subject matter under consideration?

Clarity:

Does the theory clearly state the main components to be considered? Is it easily understood by the reader?

Consistency:

Does the description of the theory address whether it maintains the definitions of the key concepts throughout the explanation? Does it have congruent use of terms, interpretations, principles, and methods?

Logical development:

Does the theory logically follow a line of thought of previous work that has been shown to be true, or does it launch out into unproven territory with its assumptions and premises? Do the conclusions proceed in a logical fashion? Are the arguments well supported?

Level of theory development:

Is it consistent with the conceptualization of middle range theory?

External Criticism

Complexity:

How many concepts are involved as key components in the theory? How complicated is the description of the theory? Can it be understood without lengthy descriptions and explanations?(considers the number of variables being addressed, exists on a continuum from parsimony-limited number of variables to complex-extensive number of variables).

Discrimination:

Is this theory able to produce hypotheses that will lead to research results that could not be arrived at using some other nursing theory? How unique is this theory to the area of nursing that it addresses? Does it have precise and clear boundaries and definitive parameters of the subject matter?

Reality convergence:

Do the theory’s underlying assumptions ring true? Do these assumptions represent the real world? Do they represent the real world of nursing? Does the theory reflect the real world as understood by the reader?

Pragmatic:

Can the theory be operationalized in real-life settings?

Scope:

How broad or narrow is the range of phenomena that this theory covers? Does it stay in a narrow range of scope to keep it a middle range theory? (Narrower implies more applicable to practice; wider implies more global and all-encompassing.)

Significance:

Will the result of the research that is conducted because of the hypothesis generated by the theory have any impact on the way nurses carry out nursing interventions in the real world, or does it merely describe what nurses do? Does the theory address issues essential, not irrelevant, to the discipline?

Utility: Discussion: Shared Theory In Palliative Care

Is the theory able to be used to generate hypotheses that are researchable by nurses? After completing the evaluation based on the criteria listed above, compare and contrast responses to the ones done by contributors for each chapter listed in Appendix A at the end of the text