Pharmacological & Non pharmacological Interventions for ADHD Paper

Weighing the Evidence

You may be familiar with the phrase, “Correlation does not imply causation.” For example, consider the following statistics:

99.7% of the people involved in air and auto accidents ate pickles within 14 days preceding the accident.

More than 90% of violent crimes are committed within 24 hours of eating bread.

As the number of churches in an area increase, so does the rate of crime.

ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED SOLUTION PAPERS

Obviously there is a faulty correlational link established in each case. This is an extremely significant concept to keep in mind when it comes to weighing the evidence in scholarly research. After researchers collect data and analyze it using the appropriate statistical tests and analyses, they must formulate interpretations about what the data, statistics, and analyses indicate. As a nurse engaged in evidence-based practice, it is important to understand how researchers generate conclusions so that you can recognize sound and unsound interpretations of data as you peruse the literature.

This week, you examine how researchers have reached their conclusions based on their data and analyze if their claims are valid.

Reference:

Anonymous. (1966). Pickles and humbug: A bit of comparative logic. The Journal of Irreproducible Results, 15(1), 18. Retrieved from http://www.jir.com/pickles.html

Reference:

Mikkelson, D., & Mikkelson B. (2006). Snopes.com: The dangers of bread. Retrieved from http://www.snopes.com/food/warnings/bread.asp

Reference:

University of Michigan. (n.d.). Power in numbers: Mastering the math you think you know. Retrieved from http://www.umich.edu/~numbers/statistics/statistic…

Learning Objectives

Students will:

Evaluate the conclusions of a research study

Analyze areas for additional research on a specific research question

Develop a cohesive, evidence-based practice to address a specific PICOT question

Photo Credit: [alvarez]/[Vetta]/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.

Review Chapter 2, Fig. 2.1

Chapter 29, “Systematic Reviews of Research Evidence: Meta-analysis, Metasynthesis, and Mixed Studies Review” This chapter focuses on the different types of systematic reviews. The chapter discusses the advantages of this type of analysis and the steps for conducting a meta-analysis or metasynthesis.

Dingle, P. (2011). Statin statistics: Lies and deception. Positive Health, 180, 1.

Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

In this article, the author outlines how misleading statistics are used to make false claims about the positive use of statin drugs in order to retain a market share of sales for pharmaceutical firms.

Katapodi, M. C., & Northouse, L. L. (2011). Comparative effectiveness research: Using systematic reviews and meta-analyses to synthesize empirical evidence. Research & Theory for Nursing Practice, 25(3), 191–209.

Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

The authors of this article assert that more comparative effectiveness research (CER) is necessary to accommodate the elevated demand for evidence-based health care practices. The article supplies a summary of methodological issues relevant to systematic reviews and meta-analyses used in the process of CER.

Stichler, J. F. (2010). Evaluating the evidence in evidence-based design. Journal of Nursing Administration, 40(9), 348–351.

Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

The quality of evidence used in EBP can vary considerably. This article highlights the necessity of critically appraising facility design research articles and using a hierarchical model to rate the strength of evidence.

Bernd, R., du Prel, J.-B., & Blettner, M. (2009). Study design in medical research: Part 2 of a series on the evaluation of scientific publications. Deutsches Aerzteblatt International, 106(11), 184–189. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC269537…

This article provides guidance in evaluating the study design of scientific publications for reliability and credibility. The authors suggest that the most important elements to consider are the question to be answered, the study population, the unit of analysis, the type of study, the measuring technique, and the calculation of sample size.

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

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

Media

Laureate Education (Producer). (2012g). Hierarchy of evidence pyramid. Baltimore, MD: Author.

This multimedia piece explains the hierarchy of evidence pyramid. The piece offers definitions and key information for each level of the pyramid.

Laureate Education (Producer). (2012n). Weighing the evidence. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 6 minutes.

In this video, Dr. Kristen Mauk provides insight about how she analyzed her data and interpreted meanings of what the data showed. She describes how she drew conclusions based on the results and how she explained unexpected findings that were contrary to her initial hypotheses.

Weighing the Evidence

When conducting original research, the final step researchers must complete is weighing the evidence and interpreting the meanings of their data, statistics, and analyses. This is the culmination of the research process in which all of the research methods and designs can be synthesized into a meaningful conclusion. In this stage, researchers should formulate explanations for what their data indicates, determine whether the data answers their initial research question, identify areas of uncertainty, and consider directions for further research.

In this Discussion, you focus on one of the research articles that you identified for Part 2 of the Course Project (Literature Review). You then explore the process of how the researchers generated conclusions based on their data, consider other possible interpretations of their data, and formulate ideas for further research.

To prepare:

Review this week’s Learning Resources, focusing on how researchers find meaning in their data and generate sound conclusions. Pay particular attention to Table 2 in the article, “Study Design in Medical Research.”

Revisit the 5 articles that you identified in Part 2 of the Course Project. Select one to consider for the purpose of this Discussion.

Read sections of the chosen article where the data is presented, analyzed, and interpreted for meaning. What reasoning process did the researchers use to formulate their conclusions? What explanation did they give to support their conclusions? Were there any weaknesses in their analysis or conclusions?

Consider possible alternate conclusions that the researchers could have drawn based on their data.

Examine the findings that the article presents and consider how well they addressed the researcher’s initial question(s). What additional research could be done to build on these findings and gain a fuller understanding of the question?

Assignment 1

WRITE an APA citation and brief summary of the research article that you selected. Describe the data and the results of any statistical tests or analyses presented in the article. Explain how the researchers formulated their conclusion, any weaknesses in their analysis or conclusions, and offer at least one alternate interpretation of their data. Propose at least one additional research study that could be done to further investigate this research topic.

Assignment 2: Course Project

Submit your Course Project. Reminder: You will combine Parts 1, 2, and 3 of your Course Project (assigned in Weeks 2, 4, and 8 respectively) into one cohesive and cogent paper. Note: In addition, include a 1-page summary of your project.

For this final iteration you will need to:

Submit your paper to Grammarly and SafeAssign through the Walden Writing Center. Based on then 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.

Pharmacological & Non pharmacological Interventions for ADHD Paper