[ad_1]
THE FIRST PART, DISCUSSION IS DUE IN 6 HOURSQualitative Research Designs For the past 2 weeks, you have focused on the features and considerations of quantitative research designs. However, quantitative designs are not appropriate for all research questions. Perhaps you are concerned with how patients react when confronted with negative test results, or you wish to study how views on a certain health topic change over time. In each of these cases, the emphasis is more on understanding the thinking and experiences of an individual or group than on numerical measurements. For these types of questions, a qualitative or mixed methods research design is the most appropriate. For this Discussion, you focus on the different types of qualitative research designs, when they are used, and why they are important. To prepare: Reflect on the comments made by Dr. Mauk in this week’s media presentation on the value of qualitative research in nursing. I HAVE INCLUDED THE TRANSCRIPT TO THE VIDEO. Locate the journal Qualitative Health Research in the Walden Library. From this journal, select an article of interest to you that was published within the last 3 years. Review the information on different qualitative research designs in Chapter 21 of your course text. Determine what qualitative research design was used in your selected article and evaluate whether it was the best choice. Consider ethical issues involved in the study and how the researchers addressed them. Think about how using a quantitative design would have affected the type of data gathered. Post an APA citation for the article that you selected and provide a summary of the content and the qualitative research design used. Evaluate the appropriateness of the design and explain how ethical issues in the study were addressed. Analyze how the study would have been different if a quantitative design had been used. Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses. I HAVE ATTACHED TWO COLLEAGUE RESPONSES AT BOTTOM OF ATTACHMENT. THE RESPONSES ARE NOT DUE UNTIL THURSDAY 10/11/18 BY 9PM EASTERN STANDARD. Respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days using one or more of the following approaches: Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, and evidence.Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence. Click on the Reply button below to reveal the textbox for entering your message. Then click on the Submit button to post your message. Bottom of Form THIS IS THE TRANSCRIPT FOR THE VIDEO Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research Designs Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research Designs Program Transcript NARRATOR: Not all nursing research involves collecting quantitative data and numerical values. Qualitative and mixed methods research studies also provide valuable insights into health care-related issues and questions. In this video, Dr. Kristen Mauk justifies the value of qualitative and mixed methods research within the nursing field, and provides an overview of a qualitative study she conducted for her doctoral dissertation. Please note that this research study is separate from the material presented in other videos in this course about Dr. Mauk’s DNP project. KRISTEN MAUK: When you’re looking at your levels of evidence, I think that qualitative gets a bad rap because it falls way low on the evidence scale. But I think you get very rich data from qualitative. You get that rich information and data that you don’t get just from looking at numbers. Now, numbers don’t lie. And so it’s great to have statistics and to know that whatever you’re choosing to do for your project has all of this great backing to it. But you’re not going to get the substance, and the richness, and the underlying feelings of participants unless you look at the qualitative piece, too. I think it’s great to have some quantitative data and also qualitative, too. A lot of students will use a post-project survey to get that qualitative piece. Ask their participants about satisfaction with the project, what would they suggest, that’s all nice qualitative rich data that can improve your research later. And also, shed light on things that you might not have known if you just hand them a survey and look at numbers. So I think there’s a place for both and we should use both in our projects. Deciding whether you’re going to do quantitative or qualitative depends on your question. And that’s why whether you’re doing EBP or original research, your question drives your method. That’s the main takeaway point. © 2013 Laureate Education, Inc. 1 Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research Designs For my PhD, I developed a grounded theory for post-stroke recovery. There was tons on what caregivers thought and the physical problems the doctors see in stroke patients. There is tons of literature on that. But there wasn’t something from the stroke survivor’s perspective themself about, how did they go through this journey? And how did they feel? And so that was something about there was little known about it. So my method was qualitative. And because I wanted to look at the process– process is grounded theory. So I could come up with a framework and a model that nurses can look at to say, here’s the process that survivors, themselves, said they go through. So here’s a couple good examples of the pitfalls of qualitative research. I asked for volunteers and I went to an assisted living, and there were several people who signed up to be a volunteer. And one of the women had had a– well, they all had strokes. And one of the women who let me interview her, I went to their homes. And so we were in her little assisted living apartment and her husband was there with her. And so I started my open-ended questions. And I said, so tell me about what happened to you from the time you had your stroke till now. And she said, I don’t remember. And then her husband had to pipe in and said her major problem after her stroke was memory loss. So every question I asked was, I don’t remember. I don’t remember. So that was one example. Another example is things like equipment failure. So I always take backup batteries, backup video, backup audio. But sometimes you’ll get to someone’s house and none of the outlets work. Or you realize that your batteries that you grabbed aren’t working, and you run out of batteries because it was an extra long interview. So just little things like that are pitfalls of actually working with people, in their home, trying to do your own equipment and things like that. I interviewed people until data saturation was reached, which is– that’s kind of a qualitative term for since we can’t do power analysis of how many people do we need to interview before we keep hearing the same thing. We call it data saturation. So once you start hearing the participants say the same thing over and over and over, then you know that you’ve reached that point of you’re not © 2013 Laureate Education, Inc. 2 Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research Designs hearing anything new. And that’s the point that determines your n, or number of subjects. So that’s different from quantitative where you could do a power analysis and say, how many variables do I have? And the more variables I have, probably the more participants I need to show that my study is valid and reliable. Because you want to make sure that you’re not looking at 100 variables and only two subjects. We can’t generalize from that. Well, for qualitative research, it’s all about trustworthiness. Trustworthiness is like the big umbrella for qualitative research. So when we talk about that, we’re talking about things like looking at how the qualitative researcher assured you that you can trust her or his results. And for me and any qualitative researcher, it’s things like audit trails, and using journaling, and keeping track of everything. Keeping really good records, writing everything down. How did you do your interviews? And describing them and giving examples of questions. And then, did you go back and talk to your participants to see if what you concluded in fact was right? Did you use focus groups? Just talking about how you came up with your question, how you investigated your question, and why should the reader believe you? So basically, I founded in my PhD research that there were six phases that stroke survivors go through, from agonizing to owning. And they are buffered by different factors such as, did they expect to have a stroke? How old were they? How severe was the stroke? And that determined how fast they went through this process. But that everybody who has a stroke kind of goes through these different phases of adjusting to it, adapting to life, blending their new and old life, finding out why they have the stroke. And eventually, if they do positively adapt and get to owning their stroke, that they have developed a new life. And they’ve just learned to live with whatever deficits that they had. But to me that was a real eye-opener because as nurses we don’t get to keep them in the hospital very long. When I first started in nursing, we would have stroke patients as long as we needed to have them. I mean, it could be months. Now you might get them 10 days in rehab. That’s not enough to teach them everything they’re going to need to adjust to life– not being able to use this arm, or move this leg, or speak. So we don’t do our teaching, probably when we should be doing it, which is later after © 2013 Laureate Education, Inc. 3 Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research Designs they’ve had a chance to see, oh, wow, this isn’t going away. I guess I need some help and need to figure out how to live like this now. So that was a big eyeopener to me, but very interesting. © 2013 Laureate Education, Inc. THESE REPLIES ARE NOT ACTUALLY DUE UNTIL THURSDAY NIGHT, 10/11/118. COLLEAGUE #1 DISCUSSION POST BELOW DISCUSSION POST BY ROBYN The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ division titled Futures Without Violence (2018) reports that one in four women experience intimate partner violence (IPV), which can be higher in LGBTQ communities. In the article, “Living in Fear and Prioritizing Safety: Exploring Women’s lives after Traumatic Brain Injury from Intimate Partner Violence,” Ivany et al. (2018) developed a qualitative study to examine the effects of IPV on women who were diagnosed with a traumatic brain injury (TBI). Researchers utilized the constructivist grounded theory approach, which involved the philosophical concept of intersectionality (Ivany et al., 2018). Intersectionality is defined as “the critical insight that race, class, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, nation, ability and age operate not as unitary, mutually exclusive entities, but as reciprocally constructing phenomena that in turn shape complex social inequities” (Ivany et al., 2018, p. 1709). This concept assisted the researchers in understanding how multiple concepts can overlap and produce a health inequality, which resulted in a feminist intersectional perspective to examine the women to identify potential barriers in obtaining resources (Ivany et al., 2018). Ultimate goals of the study were to describe the experience and context of IPV of women who reported passing out from being hit in the head and to describe the everyday impact of the TBI from IPV such as with the abuser, family, and in general (Ivany et al., 2018). Data collection consisted of primary and secondary data. Secondary data was obtained by interviewing 239 women aged 18 to 44 years old in the mid-Atlantic region of the United States with purposive sampling of the Domestic Violence Enhanced Home Visitation Program (DOVE) to identify those involved in IVP with related TBI over the course of two years (Ivany et al., 2018, p. 1709). Of the 239 women interviewed by Ivany et al. (2018), 21 out of women answered yes to “Have you ever passed out from being hit in the heard by your partner,” with 16 answering yes initially and an additional 5 answering yes throughout the two-year interview process. Of those 21 women, nine participated in the two-year study, which resulted in 29 interviews that formed the premise for the secondary analysis (Ivany et al., 2018, p. 1709). The researchers also utilized primary data by placing flyers, asking for volunteers who had passed out from being hit in the head, within women’s shelters, general social areas such as grocery stores, ads on craigslist, and snowball sampling (Ivany et al., 2018, p. 1709). Volunteers totaled 31 one, with 21 women being ineligible due to a head injury from a source not related to IPV, which resulted in 10 participants. All interviews were transcribed and stripped of identifying information prior to open code analysis and provided a situational map of concepts (Ivany et al., 2018). The most common finding of the study was the prioritization of safety, hyper-protection of children instead of seeking treatment, and falling into isolation, all of which can cause a shift in social norms such as the inability of finding a job due to potential attacker stalking or memory complications interfering with pressing charges (Ivany et al., 2018). This study appears to have utilized an appropriate design that allowed for flexibility with the participants and the ability to obtain answers openly without pressure. Dr. Mauk(Laureate, 2018) discusses that in order for researchers to promote trustworthiness, one must be aware of biases and take steps to prevent personal conflict from interfering with the data through thorough audit trails and/or journaling. Ivany et al . do not mention utilizing any of these features to promote unbiased research. Polit and Beck (2017) explained that “Constructivist (is) to acknowledge subjectivity and the researcher’s involvement in the construction and interpretation of data” (p. 476). Perhaps the researchers felt that the constructivist grounded theory design had provided a buffer for potential bias. In addition, all researchers listed are in fact, women. This can potentially reduce credibility due to situational bias or sexual bias. Also, the study only examines women who speak English with TBI due to IPV, while IPV occurs in both males and females and in different languages. While I feel that this study provides a great start for future research, I do feel that the design and framework for the study could be greatly improved by identifying and correcting potential biases. Resources: Laureate Education (Producer). (2012l). Qualitative and mixed methods research designs. Baltimore, MD: Author. Intimate Partner Violence is A Leading Health Issue. (2018). Retrieved on October 9, 2018, from http://ipvhealth.org/health/ipv-health/?gclid=CjwKCAjwo_HdBRBjEiwAiPPXpPx35TG1tCqcTxPaOsF7q6fCsDTrV44YzS3ZNRSv-y0KlP5RID9eXBoCyK4QAvD_BwE Ivany, A.S., Bullock, L., Schminkey, D., Wells, K., Sharps, P., and Kools, S. (2018). Living in fear and prioritizing safety: Explorring women’s lives after traumatic brain injury from intimate partner violence. Qualitative Health Research. 28 (11). pp. 1708–1718. Retrieved on October 9, 2018, from http://journals.sagepub.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/doi/pdf/10.1177/1049732318786705 Polit, D.F., & Beck, C.T. (2017) Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (10 ed.) Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.COLLEAGUE #2 DISCUSSION POST DISCUSSION POST BY MARIE School bullying is affecting children globally and has been a significant focus of research in several countries (Patton et al., 2015). However, in the United States, there were several school shootings before bullying behavior in schools received considerable attention from school officials, policymakers, and researchers. The article I reviewed was A Systematic Review of Research Strategies Used in Qualitative Studies on School Bullying and Victimization. The study used data collected from electronic databases to search for empirical studies that used qualitative research methodologypublished between 2004 and 2014 (Patton et al., 2015). Many of the research on school bullying found have used quantitative research methods. However, researchers have discovered that parents and teachers conceptualized bullying differently than children (Patton et al., 2015). The type of qualitative research used in this study was Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA). This type of research utilizes the participants themselves as experts in the phenomenon being analyzed, is inductive with no pre-existing hypothesis (Rawat, 2016). IPA is phenomenological in that it explores an individual’s account of an event and allows them to elaborate on and explain their experiences in their own words (Polit & Beck, 2017). One ethical issue to consider is biased. To prevent bias, researchers must set aside prior theories and assumptions to allow the data to speak for itself (Patton et al., 2015). During the study, researchers focused on the experiences of everyone involved which included the bully perpetrators, victims, and bystanders. It is also vital to remain objective to prevent additional bias caused by the perception and emotions of the researcher. Many sensitive issues may compromise the privacy and anonymity of respondents. Some participants reported that their race, religion, physical appearance, disability, and sexual orientation that could increase vulnerable to victimization (Patton et al., 2015). Researchers conducted one-on-one, semi-structured interviews which allowed researchers to be flexible and probe in areas suggested by participants’ responses (Patton et al., 2015). This type of discussion also allowed the interviewer to acquire information that the interviewer did not know to ask for nor did they have prior knowledge. If a quantitative design had been used, the result of the study would not have provided an understanding and a deeper insight into children’s perspectives of bullying behaviors or identify the differences between the children and the adults’ definitions of bullying. Qualitative studies can complement current quantitative studies by addressing gaps in knowledge that link the bullying experience with race, class, gender, childhood, and school (Patton et al., 2015). I believe the IPA study was the best choice for the researchers in this study to use as it allowed participants to express their thoughts, feelings, experiencesand it provided opportunities for participants to voice the long-term impact of bullying. However, the use of qualitative and quantitative studies together can expand and enhance the validity of research findings (Polit & Beck, 2017). References: Patton, D., Hong, J., Patel, S., Kral, M., (2015, June). A Systematic Review of Research Strategies Used in Qualitative Studies on School Bullying and Victimization. Sage Journals 18(1). Retrieved from http://journals.sagepub.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org… Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2017). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (10th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer. Rawat, K. (2016, December). Phenomenological Research Method. MethodSpace. Retrieved from https://www.methodspace.com/phenomenological-resea… .
What Students Are Saying About Us
.......... Customer ID: 12*** | Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐"Honestly, I was afraid to send my paper to you, but splendidwritings.com proved they are a trustworthy service. My essay was done in less than a day, and I received a brilliant piece. I didn’t even believe it was my essay at first 🙂 Great job, thank you!"
.......... Customer ID: 14***| Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
"The company has some nice prices and good content. I ordered a term paper here and got a very good one. I'll keep ordering from this website."
