NRS 433 Topic 3: Research Ethics and Evaluating Quantitative Research Tasks

NRS 433 Topic 3: Research Ethics and Evaluating Quantitative Research

Topic 3: Research Ethics and Evaluating Quantitative Research Tasks

NRS 433 Assignment: Rough Draft Quantitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations

Write a critical appraisal that demonstrates comprehension of two quantitative research studies. Use the “Research Critique Guidelines – Part II” document to organize your essay. Successful completion of this assignment requires that you provide a rationale, include examples, and reference content from the study in your responses.

Use the practice problem and two quantitative, peer-reviewed research articles you identified in the Topic 1 assignment to complete this assignment.

In a 1,000–1,250 word essay, summarize two quantitative studies, explain the ways in which the findings might be used in nursing practice, and address ethical considerations associated with the conduct of the study.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the for assistance.

Re: Topic 3 DQ 1
Experimental research design is a type of quantitative research design that is highly controlled and to study cause and effect with independent and dependent variables. (GCU nursing research: understanding methods for best practice chapter 3). An example of this would be conducting laboratory tests. Undergoing laboratory tests to see which antibiotics will be effective on the bacteria present would be an example of how laboratory tests are involved in experimental research design as one or more variables are manipulated to determine their effect on a dependent variable.Nonexperimental research design “is research that lacks the manipulation of an independent variable, random assignment of participants to conditions or orders of conditions, or both” (Saylor academy 2012). An example of conducting a nonexperimental research would be doing so through means of a surveys or questionnaire.The levels of control between the two are drastic. With one you have control over variables. You are able to change and manipulate variables to study the cause and effect whereas with the other you do not have that control. Specifically, with the example of conducting research through a survey, you are at the control of the group being surveyed. This could change drastically depending on who answers the survey or not rendering you out of control. Topic 3: Research Ethics and Evaluating Quantitative Research TasksReferences:

Grand Canyon University (Ed). (2018). Nursing research: Understanding methods for best practice.Retrieved from , ch.3

Sayor academy, (2012) Research Methods in Psychology: retrieved from

Re: Topic 3 DQ 2
Sampling theory is the study of a population and an amount of that population that is randomly chosen to represent the whole population. The samples could be taken from a group of people, the environment or objects. This type of theory allows for the researcher to collect, analyze and interpret data that has been obtained from the sampling theory population. Sampling theory is important since not every person, environment or object can be studied. Sampling theory must also meet strict guidelines in order to be representing the population being studied. There are two types of sampling methods, probability sampling, and non-probability sampling. Probability sampling is when all the subjects in the target population have the same chance of being chosen for the sample. Non-probability sampling methods is when the participants of the population being studied are chosen more at random and a systematic process is not used. Topic 3: Research Ethics and Evaluating Quantitative Research Tasks
Generalizability is the conclusion obtained from the sample population during the research to the general population.References:Elfil, M., & Negida, A. (2017). Sampling methods in Clinical Research; an Educational Review. Retrieved from

McNiff, P., & Petrick, M. (2019). Nursing Research: Understanding Methods for Best Practice. Retrieved 5 September 2019, from https://lc.gcumedia.com/nrs433v/nursing-research-understanding-methods-for-best-practice/v1.1/#/chapter/3

Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points
NRS-433V NRS-433V-O500 200.0

Criteria Percentage 1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%) 2: Less Than Satisfactory (75.00%) 3: Satisfactory (83.00%) 4: Good (94.00%) : Excellent (100.00%)
Content 75.0%
Quantitative Studies 5.0% Only one article is presented. Neither of the articles presented use quantitative research. Two articles are presented. Of the articles presented, only one article is based on quantitative research. N/A N/A Two articles are presented. Both articles are based on quantitative research.

Background of Study 10.0% Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is incomplete. Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is included but lacks relevant details and explanation. Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is partially complete and includes some relevant details and explanation. Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation. Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation.

Article Support of Nursing Practice 15.0% Discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is incomplete. A summary of how articles support the PICOT question is presented. It is unclear how the articles can be used to answer the proposed PICOT question. Significant information and detail is required. A general discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate general support in answering the proposed PICOT question. It is unclear how the interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in the PICOT question. Some rational or information is needed. A discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate support in answering the proposed PICOT question. The interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in the PICOT question. Minor detail or rational is needed for clarity or support. A clear discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate strong support in answering the proposed PICOT question. The interventions and comparison groups in the articles strongly compare to those identified in the PICOT question.

Method of Study 15.0% Discussion on the method of study for each article is omitted. The comparison of study methods is omitted or incomplete. A partial summary of the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is incomplete. A benefit and a limitation of each method are omitted or incomplete. There are significant inaccuracies. A general discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is summarized. A benefit and a limitation of each method are summarized. There some inaccuracies or partial omissions. More information is needed. A discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is generally described. A benefit and a limitation of each method are presented. There minor are inaccuracies. Some detail is required for accuracy or clarity. A thorough discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is described in detail. A benefit and a limitation of each method are presented. The discussion demonstrates a solid understanding of research methods.

Results of Study 15.0% Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is incomplete. A summary of the study results includes findings and implications for nursing practice but lacks relevant details and explanation. There are some omissions or inaccuracies. Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is generally presented. Overall, the discussion includes some relevant details and explanation. Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation. Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation.

Anticipated Outcomes and Outcomes Comparison 15.0% Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are omitted or are unrealistic. Comparison of research article outcomes to anticipated outcomes is incomplete. Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are partially summarized. Comparison of research article outcomes to anticipated outcomes contains omissions of key information. It is unclear how the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT and those of the current research mentioned compare. Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are summarized. Comparison of research article outcomes to anticipated outcomes is generally presented. More information is needed to fully establish how the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT and those of the current research mentioned compare. Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are discussed. A comparison of research article outcomes to anticipated outcomes of the PICOT is presented. An explanation of how the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT and those of the current research mentioned compare is presented. Some detail is needed for clarity. Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are thoroughly discussed. A detailed comparison of research article outcomes to the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT is presented. An explanation of how the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT and those of the current research mentioned compare is presented in detail.

Organization and Effectiveness 15.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose 5.0% Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

Argument Logic and Construction 5.0% Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Argument is clear and convincing and presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 5.0% Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

Format 10.0%
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) 5.0% Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. All format elements are correct. Topic 3: Research Ethics and Evaluating Quantitative Research Tasks

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 5.0% Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. Topic 3: Research Ethics and Evaluating Quantitative Research Tasks

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS

Discussion Questions (DQ)

  • Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
  • Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
  • One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
  • I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.

Weekly Participation

  • Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
  • In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
  • Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
  • Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.

APA Format and Writing Quality

  • Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
  • Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
  • I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.

Use of Direct Quotes

  • I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
  • As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
  • It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.

 

LopesWrite Policy

  • For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
  • Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
  • Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
  • Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.

Late Policy

  • The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
  • Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
  • If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
  • I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
  • As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.

Communication

  • Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me: 
    • Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
    • Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.

Rough Draft Quantitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations – Rubric

Rubric Criteria

Total 190 points

Criterion

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

3. 3: Satisfactory

4. 4: Good

5. : Excellent

Documentation of Sources

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

0 points

Sources are not documented.

7.13 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

7.89 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

8.93 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

9.5 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

Quantitative Studies

Quantitative Studies

0 points

Only one article is presented. Neither of the articles presented use quantitative research.

7.13 points

Two articles are presented. Of the articles presented, only one article is based on quantitative research.

7.89 points

N/A

8.93 points

N/A

9.5 points

Two articles are presented. Both articles are based on quantitative research.

Article Support of Nursing Practice

Article Support of Nursing Practice

0 points

Discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is incomplete.

21.38 points

A summary of how articles support the PICOT question is presented. It is unclear how the articles can be used to answer the proposed PICOT question. Significant information and detail is required.

23.65 points

A general discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate general support in answering the proposed PICOT question. It is unclear how the interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in the PICOT question. Some rational or information is needed.

26.79 points

A discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate support in answering the proposed PICOT question. The interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in the PICOT question. Minor detail or rational is needed for clarity or support.

28.5 points

A clear discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate strong support in answering the proposed PICOT question. The interventions and comparison groups in the articles strongly compare to those identified in the PICOT question.

Method of Study

Method of Study

0 points

Discussion on the method of study for each article is omitted. The comparison of study methods is omitted or incomplete.

21.38 points

A partial summary of the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is incomplete. A benefit and a limitation of each method are omitted or incomplete. There are significant inaccuracies.

23.65 points

A general discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is summarized. A benefit and a limitation of each method are summarized. There some inaccuracies or partial omissions. More information is needed.

26.79 points

A discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is generally described. A benefit and a limitation of each method are presented. There minor are inaccuracies. Some detail is required for accuracy or clarity.

28.5 points

A thorough discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is described in detail. A benefit and a limitation of each method are presented. The discussion demonstrates a solid understanding of research methods.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

7.13 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present.

7.89 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.

8.93 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.

9.5 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

Background of Study

Background of Study

0 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is incomplete.

14.25 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is included but lacks relevant details and explanation.

15.77 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is partially complete and includes some relevant details and explanation.

17.86 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation.

19 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation.

Results of Study

Results of Study

0 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is incomplete.

21.38 points

A summary of the study results includes findings and implications for nursing practice but lacks relevant details and explanation. There are some omissions or inaccuracies.

23.65 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is generally presented. Overall, the discussion includes some relevant details and explanation.

26.79 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation.

28.5 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation.

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

0 points

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

7.13 points

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

7.89 points

Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

8.93 points

Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

9.5 points

All format elements are correct.

Argument Logic and Construction

Argument Logic and Construction

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

7.13 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

7.89 points

Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

8.93 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

9.5 points

Argument is clear and convincing and presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Anticipated Outcomes and Outcomes Comparison

Anticipated Outcomes and Outcomes Comparison

0 points

Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are omitted or are unrealistic. Comparison of research article outcomes to anticipated outcomes is incomplete.

21.38 points

Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are partially summarized. Comparison of research article outcomes to anticipated outcomes contains omissions of key information. It is unclear how the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT and those of the current research mentioned compare.

23.65 points

Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are summarized. Comparison of research article outcomes to anticipated outcomes is generally presented. More information is needed to fully establish how the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT and those of the current research mentioned compare.

26.79 points

Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are discussed. A comparison of research article outcomes to anticipated outcomes of the PICOT is presented. An explanation of how the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT and those of the current research mentioned compare is presented. Some detail is needed for clarity.

28.5 points

Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are thoroughly discussed. A detailed comparison of research article outcomes to the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT is presented. An explanation of how the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT and those of the current research mentioned compare is presented in detail.

Thesis Development and Purpose

Thesis Development and Purpose

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

7.13 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

7.89 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

8.93 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

9.5 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

📚 Need a custom-written assignment from scratch?
Our expert academic writers deliver top-quality, 100% plagiarism-free work that guarantees an A+ grade.

✅ First assignment absolutely FREE!
Use code FREE at checkout for a 100% discount.

Note: We never resell papers. Every order is uniquely crafted just for you.

Get Your Free Assignment