Causes of tooth decay in elementary school children.

ORDER CUSTOM, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPERS ON Causes of tooth decay in elementary school children.

Quantitative Research Designs—Part 2

Reflect on the following scenarios:

Wanda has been involved in a research study of the causes of tooth decay in elementary school children. Twenty-five percent of the students in the free breakfast program at a local school have been screened by a local dental hygienist. The dental hygienist finds an average of 3.5 cavities per student. The same dental hygienist recently screened 25% of the students in a school with no free breakfast program, and found an average of only 1.5 cavities per student. Wanda concludes that the breakfast served to students is the cause of higher tooth decay. Do you agree with Wanda? Can you think of other causes for the higher number of cavities among the students from the school with free breakfast?

Jerry is conducting a phone survey to determine public opinions on Medicaid reform. In order to get a random sample, Jerry decides to call the tenth number on the second column of every fifth page of the phone book. He also decides to stop sampling when he has completed 50 surveys. After reaching the target number, Jerry begins to analyze the data he has gathered and is surprised to find that opposition to reform is running about 18% higher than the national average. He is at a quandary to explain this significant difference in numbers. What are some reasons you can think of for the higher rate of opposition?

As you consider these scenarios, you may note issues or problems related to the validity of the research and conclusions. This week, you assess validity in quantitative research. You are introduced to the different types of validity and why they are important to consider when evaluating evidence and research studies. You also examine common threats to validity and consider how to minimize those threats. Causes of tooth decay in elementary school children.

Learning Objectives

Students will:

Evaluate the internal validity of quantitative research studies

Assess the consequences of failing to analyze validity in quantitative research studies

Photo Credit: [Graphs and charts]/[E+]/Getty Images

Learning Resources

Note: To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.

Required Readings

Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2017). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (10th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.

Chapter 10, “Rigor and Validity in Quantitative Research”This chapter introduces the concept of validity in research and describes the different types of validity that must be addressed. Key threats to validity are also explored.

Chapter 11, “Specific Types of Quantitative Research”This chapter focuses on the specific types of quantitative research that can be selected. The focus is on the purpose of the research rather than the research design. These include such approaches as clinical trials, evaluation research, health services and outcomes research, needs assessments, or replication studies.

Cantrell, M. A. (2011). Demystifying the research process: Understanding a descriptive comparative research design. Pediatric Nursing, 37(4), 188–189.

Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

The author of this article discusses the primary aspects of a prominent quantitative research design. The article examines the advantages and disadvantages of the design.

Schultz, L. E., Rivers, K. O., & Ratusnik, D. L. (2008). The role of external validity in evidence-based practice for rehabilitation. Rehabilitation Psychology, 53(3), 294–302.

Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

This article details the results of a study that sought to balance concern for rigor with concern for relevance. The authors of the article derive and determine a rating format for relevance and apply it to cognitive rehabilitation.

Note: For the assignment this week, you will need to read the method section of one of the following quasi-experimental studies. Refer to the details provided in the Week 6 Discussion area.

Metheny, N. A., Davis-Jackson, J., & Stewart, B. J. (2010). Effectiveness of an aspiration risk-reduction protocol. Nursing Research, 59(1), 18–25.

Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

Padula, C. A., Hughes, C., & Baumhover, L. (2009). Impact of a nurse-driven mobility protocol on functional decline in hospitalized older adults. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 24(4), 325–331.

Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

Yuan, S.-C., Chou, M.-C., Hwu, L.-J., Chang, Y.-O., Hsu, W.-H., & Kuo, H.-W. (2009). An intervention program to promote health-related physical fitness in nurses. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 18(10), 1,404–1,411.

Walden University. (n.d.a.). Paper templates. Retrieved July 23, 2012, from http://writingcenter.waldenu.edu/57.htm

This resource provides you access to the School of Nursing Sample Paper, which will serve as a template for formatting your papers.

Discussion: Validity in Quantitative Research Designs

Validity in research refers to the extent researchers can be confident that the cause and effect they identify in their research are in fact causal relationships. If there is low validity in a study, it usually means that the research design is flawed and the results will be of little or no value. Four different aspects of validity should be considered when reviewing a research design: statistical conclusion validity, internal validity, construct validity, and external validity. In this Discussion, you consider the importance of each of these aspects in judging the validity of quantitative research.

To prepare:

Review the information in Chapter 10 of the course text on rigor and validity.

Read the method section of one of the following quasi-experimental studies (also located in this week’s Learning Resources). Identify at least one potential concern that could be raised about the study’s internal validity.

Metheny, N. A., Davis-Jackson, J., & Stewart, B. J. (2010). Effectiveness of an aspiration risk-reduction protocol. Nursing Research, 59(1), 18–25.

Padula, C. A., Hughes, C., & Baumhover, L. (2009). Impact of a nurse-driven mobility protocol on functional decline in hospitalized older adults. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 24(4), 325–331.

Yuan, S., Chou, M., Hwu, L., Chang, Y., Hsu, W., & Kuo, H. (2009). An intervention program to promote health-related physical fitness in nurses. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 18(10), 1,404–1,411.

Consider strategies that could be used to strengthen the study’s internal validity and how this would impact the three other types of validity.

Think about the consequences of an advanced practice nurse neglecting to consider the validity of a research study when reviewing the research for potential use in developing an evidence-based practice. Causes of tooth decay in elementary school children.

ASSIGNMENT 1:

WRITE the title of the study that you selected and your analysis of the potential concerns that could be raised about the study’s internal validity. Propose recommendations to strengthen the internal validity and assess the effect your changes could have with regard to the other three types of validity. Discuss the dangers of failing to consider the validity of a research study.

ASSIGNMENT 2: CRITIQUING QUANTITATIVE, QUALITATIVE OR MIXED METHODS STUDIES

Critiquing the validity and robustness of research featured in journal articles provides a critical foundation for engaging in evidence-based practice. In Weeks 5 and 6, you explored quantitative research designs. In Week 7, you will examine qualitative and mixed methods research designs. For this Assignment, which is due by Day 7 of Week 7, you critique a quantitative and either a qualitative or a mixed methods research study and compare the types of information obtained in each.

To prepare:

Select a health topic of interest to you that is relevant to your current area of practice. The topic may be your Course Portfolio Project or a different topic of your choice.

Using the Walden Library, locate two articles in scholarly journals that deal with your portfolio topic: 1) Select one article that utilizes a quantitative research design and 2) select a second article that utilizes either a qualitative OR a mixed methods design. These need to be single studies not systematic or integrative reviews (including meta-analysis and metasynthesis). You may use research articles from your reference list. If you cannot find these two types of research on your portfolio topic, you may choose another topic.

Locate the following documents in this week’s Learning Resources to access the appropriate templates, which will guide your critique of each article:

Critique Template for a Qualitative Study

Critique Template for a Quantitative Study

Critique Template for a Mixed-Methods Study

Consider the fields in the templates as you review the information in each article. Begin to draft a paper in which you analyze the two research approaches as indicated below. Reflect on the overall value of both quantitative and qualitative research. If someone were to say to you, “Qualitative research is not real science,” how would you respond?

To complete this Assignment:

Complete the two critiques using the appropriate templates.

Write a 2- to 3-page paper that addresses the following:

Contrast the types of information that you gained from examining the two different research approaches in the articles that you selected.

Describe the general advantages and disadvantages of the two research approaches featured in the articles. Use examples from the articles for support.

Formulate a response to the claim that qualitative research is not real science. Highlight the general insights that both quantitative and qualitative studies can provide to researchers. Support your response with references to the Learning Resources and other credible sources.

As you complete this Assignment, remember to:

Submit your paper to Grammarly and SafeAssign through the Walden Writing Center. Based on the Grammarly and SafeAssign reports, revise your paper as necessary.

Reminder: The School of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references.

attachment_1

attachment_2

attachment_3

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Critique Template for a Qualitative Study NURS 5052/NURS 6052 Week 6 Assignment: Application: Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies (due by Day 7 of Week 7) Date: Your name: Article reference (in APA style): URL: What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study. When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these: • • • Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation? What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness? How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice? To help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research study of your choice. If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor. QUALITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE 1. Research Issue and Purpose What is the research question or issue of the referenced study? What is its purpose? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the question must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.) © 2012 Laureate Education Inc. 1 2. Researcher Pre-understandings Does the article include a discussion of the researcher’s pre-understandings? What does the article disclose about the researcher’s professional and personal perspectives on the research problem? 3. Literature Review What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current, relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.) 4. Causes of tooth decay in elementary school children.

Theoretical or Conceptual Framework Is a theoretical or conceptual framework identified? If so, what is it? Is it a nursing framework or one drawn from another discipline? (Sometimes there is no explicitly identified theoretical or conceptual framework; in addition, many “nursing” research studies draw on a “borrowed” framework, e.g., stress, medical pathology, etc.) 5. Participants Who were the participants? Is the setting or study group adequately described? Is the setting appropriate for the research question? What type of sampling strategy was used? Was it appropriate? Was the sample size adequate? Did the researcher stipulate that information redundancy was achieved? 6. Protection of Human Research Participants What steps were taken to protect human research subjects? © 2012 Laureate Education Inc. 2 7. Research Design What was the design of the study? If the design was modeled from previous research or pilot studies, please describe. 8. Data Collection/Generation Methods What methods were used for data collection/generation? Was triangulation used? 9. Credibility Were the generated data credible? Explain your reasons. 10. Data Analysis What methods were used for data analysis? What evidence was provided that the researcher’s analysis was accurate and replicable? 11. Findings What were the findings? 12. Discussion of Findings Was the discussion of findings related to the framework? Were those the expected findings? Were they consistent with previous studies? Were serendipitous (i.e., accidental) findings described? 13. Limitations Did the researcher report limitations of the study? (Limitations are acknowledgments of internal characteristics of the study that may help explain insignificant and other © 2012 Laureate Education Inc. Causes of tooth decay in elementary school children.

3 unexpected findings, and more importantly, indicate those groups to whom the findings CANNOT be generalized or applied. It is a fact that all studies must be limited in some way; not all of the issues involved in a problem situation can be studied all at once.) 14. Implications Are the conclusions and implications drawn by the author warranted by the study findings? (Sometimes researchers will seem to ignore findings that don’t confirm their expectations as they interpret the meaning of their study findings.) 15. Recommendations Does the author offer legitimate recommendations for further research? Is the description of the study sufficiently clear and complete to allow replication of the study? (Sometimes researchers’ recommendations seem to come from “left field” rather than following obviously from the discussion of findings. If a research problem is truly significant, the results need to be confirmed with additional research; in addition, if a reader wishes to design a study using a different sample or correcting flaws in the original study, a complete description is necessary.) 16. Research Utilization in Your Practice How might this research inform your practice? Are the research findings appropriate to your practice setting and situation? What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness? How might the utilization of this research trigger changes in other aspects of practice? © 2012 Laureate Education Inc. 4 Critique Template for a Mixed-Methods Study NURS 5052/NURS 6052 Week 6 Assignment: Application: Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies (due by Day 7 of Week 7) Date: Your name: Article reference (in APA style): URL: What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study. When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these: • • • Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation? What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness? How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice? To help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research study of your choice. If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor. MIXED-METHODS RESEARCH CRITIQUE 1. Causes of tooth decay in elementary school children.

Research Issue and Purpose What is the research question or issue of the referenced study? What is its purpose? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the question must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.) © 2016 Laureate Education Inc. 1 1. Researcher Pre-understandings and / or Hypotheses and Research Questions Does the article include a discussion of the researcher’s pre-understandings? What does the article disclose about the researcher’s professional and personal perspectives on the research problem? What are the hypotheses (or research questions/objectives) of the study? (Sometimes the hypotheses or study questions are listed in the Results section, rather than preceding the report of the methodology used. Occasionally, there will be no mention of hypotheses, but anytime there are inferential statistics used, the reader can recognize what the hypotheses are from looking at the results of statistical analysis.) 2. Literature Review What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current, relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.) 3. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework Is a theoretical or conceptual framework identified? If so, what is it? Is it a nursing framework or one drawn from another discipline? (Sometimes there is no explicitly identified theoretical or conceptual framework; in addition, many “nursing” research studies draw on a “borrowed” framework, e.g., stress, medical pathology, etc.) 4. Participants Who were the participants? Is the setting or study group adequately described? Is the setting appropriate for the research question? What type of sampling strategy was used? Was it appropriate? Was the sample size adequate? Did the researcher stipulate that information redundancy was achieved? 5. Protection of Human Research Participants © 2016 Laureate Education Inc. 2 What steps were taken to protect human research subjects? 6. Research Design What was the design of the study? If the design was modeled from previous research or pilot studies, please describe. 7. Instruments, Data Collection, Data Generation Methods What methods were used for data collection/generation? What instruments and/or other measurement strategies were used in data collection? Was information provided regarding the reliability and validity of the measurement instruments? If so, describe it. Was triangulation used? 8. Credibility Were the generated data credible? Explain your reasons. 9. Data Analysis What methods were used for data analysis? What evidence was provided that the researcher’s analysis was accurate and replicable? 10. Findings What were the findings? 11. Discussion of Findings Was the discussion of findings related to the framework? Were those the expected findings? Were they consistent with previous studies? Were serendipitous (i.e., accidental) findings described? © 2016 Laureate Education Inc. 3 12. Limitations Did the researcher report limitations of the study? (Limitations are acknowledgments of internal characteristics of the study that may help explain insignificant and other unexpected findings, and more importantly, indicate those groups to whom the findings CANNOT be generalized or applied. It is a fact that all studies must be limited in some way; not all of the issues involved in a problem situation can be studied all at once.) 13. Implications Are the conclusions and implications drawn by the author warranted by the study findings? (Sometimes researchers will seem to ignore findings that don’t confirm their expectations as they interpret the meaning of their study findings.) 14.

Recommendations Does the author offer legitimate recommendations for further research? Is the description of the study sufficiently clear and complete to allow replication of the study? (Sometimes researchers’ recommendations seem to come from “left field” rather than following obviously from the discussion of findings. If a research problem is truly significant, the results need to be confirmed with additional research; in addition, if a reader wishes to design a study using a different sample or correcting flaws in the original study, a complete description is necessary.) 15. Research Utilization in Your Practice How might this research inform your practice? Are the research findings appropriate to your practice setting and situation? What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness? How might the utilization of this research trigger changes in other aspects of practice? © 2016 Laureate Education Inc. 4 Critique Template for a Quantitative Study NURS 5052/NURS 6052 Week 6 Assignment: Application: Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies (due by Day 7 of Week 7) Date: Your name: Article reference (in APA style): URL: What is a critique? Simply stated, a critique is a critical analysis undertaken for some purpose. Nurses critique research for three main reasons: to improve their practice, to broaden their understanding, and to provide a base for the conduct of a study. When the purpose is to improve practice, nurses must give special consideration to questions such as these: • • • Are the research findings appropriate to my practice setting and situation? What further research or pilot studies need to be done, if any, before incorporating findings into practice to assure both safety and effectiveness? How might a proposed change in practice trigger changes in other aspects of practice? To help you synthesize your learning throughout this course and prepare you to utilize research in your practice, you will be critiquing a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods research study of your choice. If the article is unavailable in a full-text version through the Walden University Library, you must e-mail the article as a PDF or Word attachment to your Instructor. QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE 1. Research Problem and Purpose What are the problem and purpose of the referenced study? (Sometimes ONLY the purpose is stated clearly and the problem must be inferred from the introductory discussion of the purpose.) © 2012 Laureate Education Inc. 1 2. Hypotheses and Research Questions What are the hypotheses (or research questions/objectives) of the study? (Sometimes the hypotheses or study questions are listed in the Results section, rather than preceding the report of the methodology used. Occasionally, there will be no mention of hypotheses, but anytime there are inferential statistics used, the reader can recognize what the hypotheses are from looking at the results of statistical analysis.) 3. Causes of tooth decay in elementary school children.

Literature Review What is the quality of the literature review? Is the literature review current? Relevant? Is there evidence that the author critiqued the literature or merely reported it without critique? Is there an integrated summary of the current knowledge base regarding the research problem, or does the literature review contain opinion or anecdotal articles without any synthesis or summary of the whole? (Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introductory section without being explicitly identified.) 4. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework Is a theoretical or conceptual framework identified? If so, what is it? Is it a nursing framework or one drawn from another discipline? (Sometimes there is no explicitly identified theoretical or conceptual framework; in addition, many “nursing” research studies draw on a “borrowed” framework, e.g., stress, medical pathology, etc.) 5. Population What population was sampled? How was the population sampled? Describe the method and criteria. How many subjects were in the sample? 6. Protection of Human Research Participants What steps were taken to protect human research subjects? © 2012 Laureate Education Inc. 2 7. Research Design What was the design of the study? If the design was modeled from previous research or pilot studies, please describe. 8. Instruments and Strategies for Measurement What instruments and/or other measurement strategies were used in data collection? Was information provided regarding the reliability and validity of the measurement instruments? If so, describe it. 9. Data Collection What procedures were used for data collection? 10. Data Analysis What methods of data analysis were used? Were they appropriate to the design and hypotheses? 11. Interpretation of Results What results were obtained from data analysis? Is sufficient information given to interpret the results of data analysis? 12. Discussion of Findings Was the discussion of findings related to the framework? Were those the expected findings? Were they consistent with previous studies? Were serendipitous (i.e., accidental) findings described? 13. Limitations © 2012 Laureate Education Inc. 3 Did the researcher report limitations of the study? (Limitations are acknowledgments of internal characteristics of the study that may help explain insignificant and other unexpected findings, and more importantly, indicate those groups to whom the findings CANNOT be generalized or applied. It is a fact that all studies must be limited in some way; not all of the issues involved in a problem situation can be studied all at once.) 14. Implications Are the conclusions and implications drawn by the author warranted by the study findings? (Sometimes researchers will seem to ignore findings that don’t confirm their hypotheses as they interpret the meaning of their study findings.) 15. Causes of tooth decay in elementary school children.