Activity 2
Evaluating a Quantitative Research Study
Examine the study- Harris, M. F., Chan, B. C., Laws, R. A., Williams, A. M., Davies, G. P., Jayasinghe, U. W., … Milat, A. (2013). The impact of a brief lifestyle intervention delivered by generalist community nurses (CN SNAP trial). BMC Public Health, 13(1). doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-375
In this assessment, you will evaluate the study according to research design methods, procedures and study results, for example, see Evaluating a Quantitative Study LoBiondo-Wood,& Haber (2018).
Suggested Reading
Chapter 7 & 8 LoBiondo-Wood, G., & Haber, J. (2018). Nursing research: Methods and critical appraisal for evidence-based practice.(9th ed) St. Louis, MO: Elsevier.
Astroth, K. S., & Chung, S. Y. (2018). Focusing on the fundamentals: Reading quantitative research with a critical eye. Nephrology Nursing Journal, 45(3), 283-287. Retrieved from http://americansentinel.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.americansentinel.idm.oclc.org/docview/2063390700?accountid=169658
Additional Instructions:
- All submissions should have a title page and reference page.
- Utilize a minimum of two scholarly resources.
- Adhere to grammar, spelling and punctuation criteria.
- Adhere to APA compliance guidelines.
- Adhere to the chosen Submission Option for Delivery of Activity guidelines.
| Submission Options | |
| Choose One: | Instructions: |
| Paper |
|
| Microsoft PowerPoint Presentation |
|
| Other media (Prezi, etc.) presentation |
|
| Video Presentation |
|
| Table |
|
| Graphs or other illustrations |
|
| Poster |
|
| Note: Title and reference pages/slides do not count towards the count requirements. | |
Evaluating a Quantitative Research Study
Student Name
University
Course
Professor Name
Date
Evaluating a Quantitative Research Study
The research article to be evaluated is titled “The Impact of a Brief Lifestyle Intervention Delivered by Generalist Community Nurses”. The purpose of the study was to assess the impact of a lifestyle intervention designed and implemented by community nurses on changes in risk behaviors including smoking, alcohol, nutrition, physical activity levels, and weight. The main focus of this evaluation is to evaluate the study’s research design, methodology, and findings. The evaluation will also include an explanation of how the study contributes to evidence-based practice (EBP) and application of the findings to clinical practice including other settings beyond community health settings.
Research Design
Harris et al. (2013) utilized the quasi-experimental design. According to LoBiondo-Wood and Haber (2018), the main purpose of a quasi-experimental design is to examine the presence of a causal relationship between an independent and dependent variable. This design differs from an experimental design in that participants are not randomly assigned to the intervention and control groups. Harris et al. (2013) selected the quasi-experimental design because they needed to establish if there is a cause and effect relationship between a lifestyle intervention and several dependent variables which included lifestyle risk factors such as nutrition, smoking, physical activity, alcohol, and overweight. The mediator variables in the study included changes in the participants’ readiness to implement lifestyle interventions. The participants were assigned to an early intervention group which was exposed to the lifestyle intervention and a comparison group which was provided with usual care for an eighteen-month period. The intervention was tailored based on the participants’ lifestyle risk factors. Those who engaged in multiple risky behaviors or were obese had access to specialist healthcare professionals who provided more intensive treatment.
The research design flowed from the literature review, purpose of the study, and the theoretical framework. Harris et al. (2013) provided a brief literature review as part of the background of the study and it identified that very few studies have assessed the impact of nurse-provided lifestyle interventions on lifestyle risk factors. Therefore, the literature review justified the need for examining the causal relationship between lifestyle interventions and changes in lifestyle risk factors. Harris et al. (2013) also used the 5As model of brief lifestyle intervention as the main theoretical framework. The main steps in the framework include screening for risk factors (ask), assessing readiness for change, providing advice, referring high risk participants to intensive treatment (assist), and arranging for follow-up services. The quasi-experimental design flowed from the framework because it enables implementation of an intervention that may facilitate lifestyle changes. Harris et al. (2013) did not implement any controls to decrease bias associated with using the quasi-experimental design and using self-reports provided by the participants as the main data. The prior sample size was 425 participants for treatment group and 371 for the comparison group. This sample reflected the population under study since there was sufficient variation in gender and age. The sampling method was convenience sampling where patients who had been referred for community nursing services were included in the study. This method is appropriate for a quasi-experimental design.
Methods/Procedures and Results
The methodology section entailed exposing the early intervention group to the lifestyle intervention with the aim of increasing physical activity, encouraging consumption of healthy diet, weight reduction, limiting alcohol intake, and smoking cessation. The scores at baseline level and after the implementation of the intervention were measured using self-report methods, and physiological measurement. LoBiondo-Wood and Haber (2018) explain that in quantitative research, physiological data collection entails the use of standardized measures to assess the participants’ status. The main standardized instruments used by Harris et al. (2013) included AUDIT-C to assess changes in alcohol intake, a brief validated physical activity tool which assessed changes in physical activity, five point intention scales which assessed participant progression in their stages of change, and validated questions obtained from the NSW survey to assess changes in vegetable and fruit servings. Data for all other outcomes including changes in weight, smoking status, physical activity, and diet changes were obtained from self reports. Harris et al. (2013) stated that all the data collection instruments were validated although there was no information regarding other rationale for instrument selection and provisions for maintaining instrument accuracy.
Self-report instruments are prone to recall bias and social desirability. Recall bias arises when participants provide wrong information because they may not accurately recall past events. For example, it is possible for participants to forget their food intake resulting in data collection errors. Social desirability bias arises from the need for approval which makes participants to provide reports that will make them seem more desirable (Althubaiti, 2016). Harris et al. (2013) used self-report measures that exposed them to these types of bias. Generally, apart from using validated data collection instruments and trained data collectors, no other steps were taken to maintain the intervention fidelity.
The results for the study were presented by comparing scores at baseline level and at 3-month follow-up for both the early and late intervention groups. The information is presented sequentially and concisely. The results indicated that lifestyle interventions can complement other interventions to limit cardiovascular risk factors within the community. The findings support that lifestyle interventions increase readiness for engaging in physical activity but not weight loss and changes in other lifestyle behaviors. Harris et al. (2013) also provided a discussion of how the findings supported the theoretical framework and encouraged the use of the 5As model in reducing risk factors and promoting better health outcomes. The study identified the limitations of the research method including biases that affected the reliability and generalizability of the findings.
Importance of the Research and Contribution to EBP
Research is very important since it helps expand the knowledge base in all fields including the nursing profession and makes it possible to access the latest information. Research also facilitates provision of better care in the healthcare industry (Chien, 2019). Harris et al. (2013) conducted a research that contributed to knowledge regarding lifestyle interventions.
Evidence-based practice (EBP) refers to the process where healthcare professionals, including nurses, use scientifically-proven and critically appraised evidence to inform their practice. EBP is essential in the provision of quality healthcare since it informs decision making when developing patient interventions (Li et al., 2019). The research conducted by Harris et al. (2013) provided important evidence that lifestyle interventions can be used by community nurses to reduce risk factors for cardiovascular illnesses and improve patient outcomes. The findings of the study are mainly applicable in primary care settings. The study also indicated the importance of nurse training to facilitate better identification of risk factors. Additionally, for the intervention group, the study emphasized on personalizing the intervention according to the risk factors experienced by the participants. This step illustrates the importance of patient-centered care which is a critical component of EBP.
The findings obtained from the study are applicable in community health practice. The main benefits that patients may enjoy if the findings are implemented in practice include access to patient-centered lifestyle interventions that reduce cardiovascular risks. The study’s findings are also applicable to patients with different risk factors since the lifestyle intervention considered patient-specific needs which makes the findings more generalizable to other populations. It is possible to replicate the study in other healthcare settings since Harris et al. (2013) provided a thorough description of the research procedures and lifestyle risk factors influence patient health in all other clinical settings. For instance, Gate et al. (2016) explain that in inpatient settings, diet changes are necessary for good health. Physical activity is also encouraged to promote better ambulation and independence among patients. However, implementing the findings may be difficult in areas which lack sufficient human and material resources in their healthcare centers.
Conclusion
The research design utilized in the study was the quasi-experimental design which aligned with the purpose of the study, theoretical framework, and literature review. Data for the study was mainly collected using validated instruments and self-reports. However, using self-reports increased the risk of recall and social desirability bias. Despite this limitation, the study made significant contributions to knowledge on the importance of lifestyle interventions in the prevention and management of cardiovascular risk factors in community health nursing. The findings are also generalizable due to the use of a large sample size with different characteristics.
References
Althubaiti A. (2016). Information bias in health research: definition, pitfalls, and adjustment methods. Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 9, 211–217. https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S104807
Chien, L. (2019). Evidence-Based Practice and Nursing Research. Journal of Nursing Research, 27(4), e29. https://doi.org/10.1097/jnr.0000000000000346
Gate, L., Warren-Gash, C., Clarke, A., Bartley, A., Fowler, E., & Semple, G. et al. (2016). Promoting lifestyle behaviour change and well-being in hospital patients: a pilot study of an evidence-based psychological intervention. Journal of Public Health, 38(3), e292-e300. https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdv141
Li, S., Cao, M., & Zhu, X. (2019). Evidence-based practice: Knowledge, attitudes, implementation, facilitators, and barriers among community nurses-systematic review. Medicine, 98(39), e17209. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000017209
LoBiondo-Wood, G., & Haber, J. (2018). Nursing research: Methods and critical appraisal for evidence-based practice. (9th ed) St. Louis, MO: Elsevier.