Interpretation of Research Discussion

ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT:  Interpretation of Research Discussion  

Article Analysis 1

Article Citation and Permalink (APA format)	Basch, E., Deal, A. M., Kris, M. G., Scher, H. I., Hudis, C. A., Sabbatini, P., Schrag, D. (2016). Symptom Monitoring With Patient-Reported Outcomes During Routine Cancer Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 34(6), 557–565. Link: 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.0830	Hailu, Fikadu Balcha et al. “Diabetes Self-Management Education (DSME) – Effect on Knowledge, Self-Care Behavior, and Self-Efficacy Among Type 2 Diabetes Patients in Ethiopia: A Controlled Clinical Trial.” Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity: targets and therapy vol. 12 2489-2499. Link: 10.2147/DMSO.S223123	Periasamy, U., Sidik, S. M., Rampal, L., Fadhilah, S. I., Akhtari-Zavare, M., & Mahmud, R. (2017). Effect of chemotherapy counseling by pharmacists on quality of life and psychological outcomes of oncology patients in Malaysia: a randomized control trial. Health and quality of life outcomes, 15(1), 104. Link:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0680-2
Point	Description	Description	Description
Broad Topic Area/Title	Symptom monitoring during routine cancer care using patient-reported outcomes.	Effects of diabetes self-management education (DSME) intervention on patients’ self-reported levels of diabetes knowledge, self-care behaviors, and self-efficacy.	Effectiveness of a chemotherapy counseling module by pharmacists among oncology patients.
Identify Independent and Dependent Variables and Type of Data for the Variables	Symptoms reporting (discrete data ) Health-related quality of life (HRQL) (Nominal Data) Emergency room (ER) visits, hospitalizations, and survival (Continuous data).	Diabetes self-management education (DSME) intervention, Usual care (Discrete data). Diabetes knowledge, self-care behaviors, and self-efficacy (Nominal data)	Repetitive Counselling (discrete data) Quality of life (Nominal data) Psychological issues (continuous data)
Population of Interest for the Study	Patients initiating chemotherapy at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK) in New York for metastatic breast, genitourinary, gynecologic, or lung cancers	Adult patients with T2DM attending Jimma University Medical Centre (JUMC) in Ethiopia.	Malaysia patients above 18 years old in different stages of cancers which undergoing their 1th and 2nd cycles of chemotherapy and able to read.
Sample	766 patients Computer –experienced – 539 Computer inexperienced – 227 (150 assigned to STAR and 75 to usual care)	At endpoint 142 78 intervention group participants 64 comparison group participants	161 patients Intervention 81 Control = 80
Sampling Method	Participants were first grouped as computer experienced and computer inexperienced depending on computer and email use and then randomized in respective groups.	Excel’s random number generator assigned 120 patients to intervention group and 120 patients to comparison group	Random sampling was used to group eligible patients.
Descriptive Statistics (Mean, Median, Mode; Standard Deviation)	Mean time on study 7.4 months Median time was 3.7 months (range, 0.25 to 49) Mean of 16 clinic visits per patient (range, 1 to 114).	Mean age 47 (10) years Mean  number of living with diabetes: intervention group  10 (6) years and comparison group 12 (7) years Intervention group mean diabetes knowledge score, 11.33 out of 20, comparison group, 10.61 out of 20. Intervention group participants performed foot care for a mean of 5.80 days per week, compared to 5.26 days for the comparison group	Average age of the respondents was 65 years (mean = 65.49 ± 1.4; 95% CI = 64.08–66.90) Mean differences of quality of life 81.95
Inferential Statistics	Mean HRQL scores declined by less in the intervention arm compared with usual care (1.4- v 7.1-point drop; P < .001 Significant differences in quality-adjusted survival were observed during this 1-year period for all patients (mean of 8.0 v 8.7 months; P = .004) and were statistically significant in both subgroups	Mean DKS score significantly increased by 0.76 in the intervention group and decreased by 0.16 in the comparison group from baseline to endpoint (p = 0.044) mean number of days per week that the intervention group participants followed specific dietary recommendations significantly increased by 2.65 days from baseline to endpoint (p = 0.019)	The mean differences of anxiety −0.31, (−0.59–0.03; p = 0.028) and depression −0.56, (−0.85–0.27; p = 0.000) for the intervention group was significantly lower compared to the control group from baseline until 3rd follow up.

Question Description
I’m working on a Health & Medical exercise and need support.

Article Analysis 1
The interpretation of research in health care is essential to decision making. By understanding research, health care providers can identify risk factors, trends, outcomes for treatment, health care costs and best practices. To be effective in evaluating and interpreting research, the reader must first understand how to interpret the findings. You will practice article analysis in Topics 2, 3, and 5.

For this assignment:

Search the GCU Library and find three different health care articles that use quantitative research. Do not use articles that appear in the Topic Materials or textbook. Complete an article analysis for each using the “Article Analysis 1” template.

Refer to the “Patient Preference and Satisfaction in Hospital-at-Home and Usual Hospital Care for COPD Exacerbations: Results of a Randomised Controlled Trial,” in conjunction with the “Article Analysis Example 1,” for an example of an article analysis.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

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 LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.

Attachments
HLT-362V-RS2-ArticleAnalysisExample-1.docx
HLT-362V-RS2-ArticleAnalysis-1-Template.docx

Interpretation of Research Discussion

Interpretation of Research Discussion

You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes.

Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages.

Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor.

The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.

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.