Assigment .Apa seven . All instructions attached.

profilebutterflyl
EpidemiologicalResearchStudyReview1.docx
Home>Nursing homework help>Assigment .Apa seven . All instructions attached.

Students you will be required to review two epidemiological studies as this is a large part of this class. The Porche (2022) textbook has  Appendix E:  Critique Appraisal Tools Template which provides you with ready made templates to review the appropriate type studies so these would be the best and the expected way to submit the review of the research. I will provide some additional critieria in the near future but stay tuned for an update.

For both of the  Epidemiological Study Reviews  you are required to  find 2 research studies  based on the criteria that you identify here. You must include a few short paragraphs detailing the following information below (the clinical problem with supporting data; the PICO problem and the literature review or how you found your article. Describe how the identified research article informs your topic and what type of research study it is. Once you have identified the appropriate type of research study you will use the correlating Research Critique Template  (Appendix E of the Porsche, 2022 textbook) to critique . 

You will do this for both the Critique assignments (which can be on the same PICO(T) question. 

Each of the two Study Reviews needs: 

A. Be based in the concepts of population health and epidemiology

B.  MUST be a research study,  capable of being critiqued according to one of the templates provided in Appendix E. (At this point as a Master's prepared nurse you should be able to identify various types of research studies and know how to search the library databases so this should be fairly easy). 

C. Make sure the research article focuses on the topic  from a nursing perspective and NOT a medical perspective.  

D. Identify your research articles using the following criteria which each student will attach to the  submitted critique an APA 7th edition formatted Word document  with the following information. 

· Describe in your own words a clinical problem you would like to examine. Explain why you think it is important to address this problem

· Write a clinical question using the PICO format.

· The acronym stands for population studied (P), intervention (I), comparison (C), and outcome (O). These are the key components of a well-focused question.

· Carry out a literature review for the PICO question you wrote above.  Establish criteria for inclusion and exclusion of studies (must be published in the past five years, must be a research study and must be relevant to inform your topic). 

You will submit the assignments under the Research Critique Assignment Tab.

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Epidemiological Study Reviews Content

1.

Top of Form

UPLOAD Epi Research Study Review #1 with article. 

The assignment instructions for the Research Reviews is found under the assignments folder in Blackboard in the document marked Research Epidemiological Study Reviews. Upload BOTH your  research article  AND the  Study Review #1  using the research appropriate form found in Appendix E (you must use the form format that is appropriate to the type of epidemiological research study that you reviewed) in the Assignments folder and your textbook. Follow the grading rubric  AND UPLOAD THE RESEARCH ARTICLE REVIEWED. I cannot grade the assignment without having a copy of the original article to review.   REMEMBER both the appropriate study review form using the textbook Appendix E AND the research article must be uploaded and the grading rubric followed to receive credit for this assignment. 

Bottom of Form

Appendix E: Critical Appraisal Tools Templates

·

·   

CASE-CONTROL

Citation:

Study Design:

Level of Evidence:

Introduction/Background

Comments/Appraisal

· Rationale provided for study

· Significance of study provided

· Current state of science or evidence clearly articulated

· Problem statement or area identified

· Research purpose clearly stated

Design

Comments/Appraisal

· Research question clearly defined and focused?

· Cases clearly defined?

· What is the case definition?

· Were cases incident or prevalent?

· How were cases selected?

· What proportion of eligible cases were included in study?

· Controls clearly defined?

· Were controls adequate?

· How were controls selected? Selection procedure clearly defined?

· Were controls independent of exposure?

· What proportion of controls were included in study?

· How were exposures ascertained?

· Exposure was clear, specific, and measurable. How was exposure measured?

· What was the potential for exposure misclassification?

· Was exposure determination similar for cases and controls?

· Sample recruitment and selection was appropriate?

· Study variables clearly identified? How were study variables measured?

· Level of significance established

· Data management and analysis plan clearly described

Results/Findings

Comments/Appraisal

· How comparable were the cases and controls?

· Were potential confounders equally distributed between cases and controls?

· Were potential confounders adjusted for? How were the confounders adjusted for?

· Sample size appropriate based on power analysis?

· What was the strength of association between the exposure and outcome?

· How accurate was the estimate of association between the exposure and outcome (confidence intervals or p-values)?

Bias/Confounders

Comments/Appraisal

· What was the potential for recall bias? What research strategies were used to reduce recall bias?

· Did the researcher identify all potentially critical confounders?

· What was the potential for selection bias and information bias?

Implications of Findings/Results

Comments/Appraisal

· What is the potential application of findings to practice?

· Were all the clinically important outcomes considered?

· How do the study findings fit within the existing state of science and available evidence?

· Were the recommendations supported by the study findings?

Strengths

Comments/Appraisal

· What are the major strengths of the study design?

· What are the major weaknesses of the study design?

Limitations

Comments/Appraisal

· What are the major limitations of the overall study design?

· What are the major limitations of the sampling method?

· What are the major limitations of the measurement methods?

· What are the major limitations of the data management and analysis methods?

Ethical/Legal

Comments/Appraisal

· Did the research consider human subjects protection?

· How were the human subjects rights protected?

· Any ethical concerns identified?

· Any potential conflicts of interest identified?

· Any legal concerns identified?

COHORT DESIGN

Citation:

Study Design:

Level of Evidence:

Introduction/Background

Comments/Appraisal

· Rationale provided for study

· Significance of study provided

· Current state of science or evidence clearly articulated

· Problem statement or area identified

· Research purpose clearly stated

Design

Comments/Appraisal

· Research question clearly defined and focused

· Cohort identified

· How was the exposed cohort selected?

· Was there clear and defined selection criteria for inclusion of the exposed cohort?

· What proportion of eligible subjects were included in exposed cohort?

· How was the nonexposed cohort selected?

· Was there clear and defined selection criteria for inclusion of the nonexposed cohort?

· What proportion of the eligible subjects were included in the nonexposed cohort?

· What was the exposure?

· Was the exposure specific and measurable?

· What was the potential for misclassification of the exposure?

· How long was the cohort followed? Was this time period adequate?

Results/Findings

Comments/Appraisal

· What measures were implemented to reduce attrition? What was the rate of attrition?

· Was there a difference in those who were lost to attrition and those who remained in the cohort study?

· What were the primary and secondary study outcomes? How were the outcomes measured? Was the measurement valid and reliable?

· Any surrogate outcome measures identified? How were the surrogate outcomes measured? Surrogate measurement was valid and reliable?

· What was the comparative analysis of the exposed and nonexposed cohort?

· Sample size appropriate based on power analysis; rationale for sample size estimation appropriate?

· What was the strength of association between the exposure and outcome?

· How accurate was the estimate of association between the exposure and outcome (confidence intervals or p-values)?

Bias/Confounders

Comments/Appraisal

· What was the potential for recall bias? What research strategies were used to reduce recall bias?

· Was there potential for selection bias? What strategies were used to reduce selection bias?

· Did the researcher identify all potential confounders?

· What was the potential for information bias? What strategies were used to reduce information bias?

· Was there potential for historical or maturation bias? What strategies were used to reduce historical or maturation bias?

Implications of Findings/Results

Comments/Appraisal

· What is the potential application of findings to practice?

· Were all the clinically important outcomes considered?

· How do the study findings fit within the existing state of science and available evidence?

· Were the recommendations supported by the study findings?

Strengths

Comments/Appraisal

· What are the major strengths of the study design?

· What are the major weaknesses of the study design?

Limitations

Comments/Appraisal

· What are the major limitations of the overall study design?

· What are the major limitations of the sampling method?

· What are the major limitations of the measurement methods?

· What are the major limitations of the data management and analysis methods?

Ethical/Legal

Comments/Appraisal

· Did the research consider human subjects protection?

· How were the human subjects rights protected?

· Any ethical concerns identified?

· Any potential conflicts of interest identified?

· Any legal concerns identified?

RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL EXPERIMENTAL STUDY DESIGN

Citation:

Study Design:

Level of Evidence:

Introduction/Background

Comments/Appraisal

· Rationale provided for study

· Significance of study provided

· Current state of science or evidence clearly articulated

· Problem statement or area identified

· Research purpose clearly stated

Design

Comments/Appraisal

· Research question clearly defined and focused?

· Does the randomized controlled trial (RCT) meet criteria for an experimental study—manipulation, randomization, control group?

· Was there random assignment to treatment group? How was randomization achieved?

· Were there established criteria for inclusion in the treatment and control group?

· Was there a protocol to guide the intervention/treatment? Data collection time intervals were adequate?

· What was the sampling method? Was the method appropriate for RCT?

· Was an intent to treat analysis conducted?

· What type of blinding occurred in the study?

· Outcome measurements were valid and reliable?

Results/Findings

Comments/Appraisal

· What measures were implemented to reduce attrition? What was the rate of attrition?

· Was there a difference in those who were lost to attrition and those who remained in the study?

· Sample size appropriate based on power analysis; rationale for sample size estimation appropriate?

· What is the strength of the findings related to the intervention/treatment and outcome?

· What was the comparative analysis of the intervention and control group?

· What were the primary and secondary endpoints in the study?

· How large was the treatment/intervention effect? What is the estimated treatment effect?

Bias/Confounders

Comments/Appraisal

· What was the potential for recall bias? What research strategies were used to reduce recall bias?

· Was there potential for selection bias? What strategies were used to reduce selection bias?

· Did the researcher identify all potentially confounders?

· What was the potential for information bias? What strategies were used to reduce information bias?

· Was there potential for historical or maturation bias? What strategies were used to reduce historical or maturation bias?

· Were there any indications to stop the RCT early?

· Were there reported adverse events?

· Were there revisions in the intervention protocol?

Implications of Findings/Results

Comments/Appraisal

· What is the potential application of findings to practice?

· Were all the clinically important outcomes considered?

· How does the study findings fit within the existing state of science and available evidence?

· Were the recommendations supported by the study findings?

Strengths

Comments/Appraisal

· What are the major strengths of the study design?

· What are the major weaknesses of the study design?

Limitations

Comments/Appraisal

· What are the major limitations of the overall study design?

· What are the major limitations of the sampling method?

· What were the major limitations associated with the intervention protocol?

· What are the major limitations of the measurement methods?

· What are the major limitations of the data management and analysis methods?

Ethical/Legal

Comments/Appraisal

· Did the research consider human subjects protection?

· How were the human subjects rights protected?

· Any ethical concerns identified?

· Any potential conflicts of interest identified?

· Any legal concerns identified?

DIAGNOSTIC STUDY

Citation:

Study Design:

Level of Evidence:

Introduction/Background

Comments/Appraisal

· Significance of study provided

· Rationale for needed screening or diagnostic test

· Research purpose or question clearly stated?

· Current screening and diagnostic test available?

· Explanation of psychometrics, sensitivity, specificity, predictive value positive and predictive value negative of current screening and diagnostic test?

Design

Comments/Appraisal

· What was the study design?

· What were the sampling methods used? Were the methods adequate?

· Was there a comparative analysis with a “gold” standard test?

Results/Findings

Comments/Appraisal

· What are the major findings?

· What are the sensitivity results?

· What are the specificity results?

· What are the predictive value positive results?

· What are the predictive value negative results?

· Was the test evaluated in an appropriate population?

· Was there a reference standard applied to the subjects?

· How are the test results interpreted? Was a cut-off score determined?

Implications of Findings/Results

Comments/Appraisal

· What is the potential application of findings to practice?

· Were all the clinically important outcomes considered?

· How does the study findings fit within the existing state of science and available evidence?

· Does the test meet the criteria for a good screening test?

· Were the recommendations supported by the study findings?

Strengths

Comments/Appraisal

· What are the major strengths of the study design?

· What are the major weaknesses of the study design?

Limitations

Comments/Appraisal

· What are the major limitations of the overall study design?

· What are the major limitations of the sampling method?

· What were the major limitations associated with the intervention protocol?

· What are the major limitations of the measurement methods?

· What are the major limitations of the data management and analysis methods?

Ethical/Legal

Comments/Appraisal

· Did the research consider human subjects protection?

· How were the human subjects rights protected?

· Any ethical concerns identified?

· Any potential conflicts of interest identified?

· Any legal concerns identified?

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Citation:

Study Design:

Level of Evidence:

Introduction/Background

Comments/Appraisal

· Rationale provided for study

· Significance of study provided

Design

Comments/Appraisal

· Was review question clearly and explicitly stated? Was the systematic review question focused?

· What was the systematic review question?

· Was the search strategy presented?

· Was the search strategy comprehensive and exhaustive? Were all relevant studies included?

· What databases were searched? What were the limitations of the search strategy? Was the gray literature included?

· What were the inclusion and exclusion criteria? Are these criteria justified?

· Was study selection reproducible?

· How was validity and quality assessed?

· Was the validity and quality assessment conducted in a manner that was reproducible?

· Was the methodological quality of each study rated and stated?

· For a meta-analysis, were the study results pooled together for analysis? What were the meta-analysis methods? What statistical modeling was used in the meta-analysis?

· Was the criteria for appraising the studies presented? Was the criteria appropriate?

· Was the critical appraisal of each study conducted by two or more independent reviewers?

· What were the methods used to minimize errors in data extraction?

· Was there an assessment for heterogeneity? What method was used?

· Were the methods used to combine and synthesize studies presented? Were the methods appropriate?

Results/Findings

Comments/Appraisal

· Were the study populations similar or different? How?

· Was the exposure measured the same in each study? If not, how was each measured? How did they differ in measurement?

· Was each intervention or outcome measured in the same manner in each study? If not, how was each measured? How did the measurement differ in each study?

· What were the consistent measurements among each study?

· What were all measurements cited from all studies?

· Was a cost–benefit analysis completed? What were the findings?

· What are the overall findings of the systematic review?

Bias/Confounders

Comments/Appraisal

· Was there potential for selection bias? What strategies were used to reduce selection bias?

· Was there any evidence of publication bias? How was publication bias assessed?

Implications of Findings/Results

Comments/Appraisal

· What is the potential application of findings to practice?

· Were all the clinically important outcomes considered?

· How does the study findings fit within the existing state of science and available evidence and practice?

· Were the recommendations supported by the study findings?

Strengths

Comments/Appraisal

· What are the major strengths of the study design?

· What are the major weaknesses of the study design?

Limitations

Comments/Appraisal

· What are the major limitations of the overall study design?

· What are the major limitations of the sampling method?

Ethical/Legal

Comments/Appraisal

· Did the research consider human subjects protection?

· How were the human subjects rights protected?

· Any ethical concerns identified?

· Any potential conflicts of interest identified?

· Any legal concerns identified?

Bottom of Form