Expert Homework Help Online & Write My Essay Service

Hire best homework helpers for online homework help 24/7. Are you looking for online homework help? Try our excellent homework help who can help you get A+ grade in your assignment.

Order my paper
Calculate your essay price
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

19 k happy customers
9.5 out of 10 satisfaction rate
527 writers active

Nursing intervention critique essay

Nursing intervention critique essayNursing intervention critique essayChecklist items are worded so that 1 of 5 responses is possible:++ Indicates that for that particular aspect of study design, the study has been designed or conducted in such a way as to minimise the risk of bias.+ Indicates that either the answer to the checklist question is not clear from the way the study is reported, or that the study may not have addressed all potential sources of bias for that particular aspect of study design.− Should be reserved for those aspects of the study design in which significant sources of bias may persist.Not reported (NR) Should be reserved for those aspects in which the study under review fails to report how they have (or might have) been considered.Nursing intervention critique essayNot applicable (NA) Should be reserved for those study design aspects that are not applicable given the study design under review (for example, allocation concealment would not be applicable for case control studies).ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HEREIn addition, the reviewer is requested to complete in detail the comments section of the quality appraisal form so that the grade awarded for each study aspect is as transparent as possible.Each study is then awarded an overall study quality grading for internal validity (IV) and a separate one for external validity (EV):++ All or most of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled, where they have not been fulfilled the conclusions are very unlikely to alter.+ Some of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled, where they have not been fulfilled, or not adequately described, the conclusions are unlikely to alter.− Few or no checklist criteria have been fulfilled and the conclusions are likely or very likely to alter.Nursing intervention critique essayChecklistStudy identification: (Include full citation details)  Study design:Refer to the glossary of study designs ( appendix D ) and the algorithm for classifying experimental and observational study designs ( appendix E ) to best describe the paper’s underpinning study design  Guidance topic:  Assessed by:  Section 1: Population1.1 Is the source population or source area well described?Was the country (e.g. developed or non-developed, type of healthcare system), setting (primary schools, community centres etc.), location (urban, rural), population demographics etc. adequately described? +++−NRNA Comments:1.2 Is the eligible population or area representative of the source population or area?Was the recruitment of individuals, clusters or areas well defined (e.g. advertisement, birth register)?Was the eligible population representative of the source? Were important groups under-represented?Nursing intervention critique essay +++−NRNA Comments:1.3 Do the selected participants or areas represent the eligible population or area?Was the method of selection of participants from the eligible population well described?What % of selected individuals or clusters agreed to participate? Were there any sources of bias?Were the inclusion or exclusion criteria explicit and appropriate? +++−NRNA Comments:Section 2: Method of allocation to intervention (or comparison)2.1 Allocation to intervention (or comparison). How was selection bias minimised?Was allocation to exposure and comparison randomised? Was it truly random ++ or pseudo-randomised + (e.g. consecutive admissions)?If not randomised, was significant confounding likely (−) or not (+)?If a cross-over, was order of intervention randomised?Nursing intervention critique essay +++−NRNA Comments:2.2 Were interventions (and comparisons) well described and appropriate?Were interventions and comparisons described in sufficient detail (i.e. enough for study to be replicated)?Was comparisons appropriate (e.g. usual practice rather than no intervention)? +++-−NRNA Comments:2.3 Was the allocation concealed?Could the person(s) determining allocation of participants or clusters to intervention or comparison groups have influenced the allocation?Adequate allocation concealment (++) would include centralised allocation or computerised allocation systems. +++−NRNA Comments:2.4 Were participants or investigators blind to exposure and comparison?Were participants and investigators – those delivering or assessing the intervention kept blind to intervention allocation? (Triple or double blinding score ++)If lack of blinding is likely to cause important bias, score −.Nursing intervention critique essay +++−NRNA Comments:2.5 Was the exposure to the intervention and comparison adequate?Is reduced exposure to intervention or control related to the intervention (e.g. adverse effects leading to reduced compliance) or fidelity of implementation (e.g. reduced adherence to protocol)?Was lack of exposure sufficient to cause important bias? +++−NRNA Comments:2.6 Was contamination acceptably low?Did any in the comparison group receive the intervention or vice versa?If so, was it sufficient to cause important bias?If a cross-over trial, was there a sufficient wash-out period between interventions?Nursing intervention critique essay +++−NRNA Comments:2.7 Were other interventions similar in both groups?Did either group receive additional interventions or have services provided in a different manner?Were the groups treated equally by researchers or other professionals?Was this sufficient to cause important bias? +++−NRNA Comments:2.8 Were all participants accounted for at study conclusion?Were those lost-to-follow-up (i.e. dropped or lost pre-,during or post-intervention) acceptably low (i.e. typically <20%)?Did the proportion dropped differ by group? For example, were drop-outs related to the adverse effects of the intervention? +++−NRNA Comments:2.9 Did the setting reflect usual UK practice?Did the setting in which the intervention or comparison was delivered differ significantly from usual practice in the UK? For example, did participants receive intervention (or comparison) condition in a hospital rather than a community-based setting?Nursing intervention critique essay +++−NRNA Comments:2.10 Did the intervention or control comparison reflect usual UK practice?Did the intervention or comparison differ significantly from usual practice in the UK? For example, did participants receive intervention (or comparison) delivered by specialists rather than GPs? Were participants monitored more closely? +++−NRNA Comments:Section 3: Outcomes3.1 Were outcome measures reliable?Were outcome measures subjective or objective (e.g. biochemically validated nicotine levels ++ vs self-reported smoking −)?How reliable were outcome measures (e.g. inter- or intra-rater reliability scores)?Was there any indication that measures had been validated (e.g. validated against a gold standard measure or assessed for content validity)?Nursing intervention critique essay +++−NRNA Comments:3.2 Were all outcome measurements complete?Were all or most study participants who met the defined study outcome definitions likely to have been identified? +++−NRNA Comments:3.3 Were all important outcomes assessed?Were all important benefits and harms assessed?Was it possible to determine the overall balance of benefits and harms of the intervention versus comparison? +++−NRNA Comments:3.4 Were outcomes relevant?Where surrogate outcome measures were used, did they measure what they set out to measure? (e.g. a study to assess impact on physical activity assesses gym membership – a potentially objective outcome measure – but is it a reliable predictor of physical activity?) +++NRNA Comments:3.5 Were there similar follow-up times in exposure and comparison groups?If groups are followed for different lengths of time, then more events are likely to occur in the group followed-up for longer distorting the comparison.Nursing intervention critique essayAnalyses can be adjusted to allow for differences in length of follow-up (e.g. using person-years). +++NRNA Comments:3.6 Was follow-up time meaningful?Was follow-up long enough to assess long-term benefits or harms?Was it too long, e.g. participants lost to follow-up? +++−NRNA Comments:Section 4: Analyses4.1 Were exposure and comparison groups similar at baseline? If not, were these adjusted?Were there any differences between groups in important confounders at baseline?If so, were these adjusted for in the analyses (e.g. multivariate analyses or stratification).Were there likely to be any residual differences of relevance? +++−NRNA Comments:4.2 Was intention to treat (ITT) analysis conducted?Were all participants (including those that dropped out or did not fully complete the intervention course) analysed in the groups (i.e. intervention or comparison) to which they were originally allocated?Nursing intervention critique essay +++−NRNA Comments:4.3 Was the study sufficiently powered to detect an intervention effect (if one exists)?A power of 0.8 (that is, it is likely to see an effect of a given size if one exists, 80% of the time) is the conventionally accepted standard.Is a power calculation presented? If not, what is the expected effect size? Is the sample size adequate? +++−NRNA Comments:4.4 Were the estimates of effect size given or calculable?Were effect estimates (e.g. relative risks, absolute risks) given or possible to calculate?Nursing intervention critique essay +++−NRNA Comments:4.5 Were the analytical methods appropriate?Were important differences in follow-up time and likely confounders adjusted for?If a cluster design, were analyses of sample size (and power), and effect size performed on clusters (and not individuals)?Were subgroup analyses pre-specified? +++−NRNA Comments:4.6 Was the precision of intervention effects given or calculable? Were they meaningful?Were confidence intervals or p values for effect estimates given or possible to calculate?Were CI’s wide or were they sufficiently precise to aid decision-making? If precision is lacking, is this because the study is under-powered? +++−NRNA Comments:Section 5: Summary5.1 Are the study results internally valid (i.e. unbiased)?How well did the study minimise sources of bias (i.e. adjusting for potential confounders)?Were there significant flaws in the study design? +++− Comments:5.2 Are the findings generalisable to the source population (i.e. externally valid)?Are there sufficient details given about the study to determine if the findings are generalisable to the source population? Consider: participants, interventions and comparisons, outcomes, resource and policy implications.Nursing intervention critique essay

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more