Age Discrimination In Promotion ✓ Solved

```html

Age Discrimination in Promotion Age Discrimination in Promotion

Using the six peer-reviewed literature articles from your annotated bibliography, compose an integrated review that focuses on a clinical issue of interest. Ensure that the topic of this integrated review is viewed from the perspective of a healthcare professional who is looking to validate the need for program evaluation at a hospital. Specifically, your integrated review should focus on the following critical elements:

I. Abstract

Craft a well-drafted abstract. Be sure to adhere to the guidelines from the latest edition of the American Psychological Association’s style guide. Consider the appropriate length for your audience.

II. Introduction

a) State the purpose, aims, or objectives of the integrated review. What do you wish to achieve through the drafting of this review? Be explicit in your answer.

b) Introduce the topic of interest. Why is this topic the focus of the review?

c) What is the research question you are going to focus on? If you were to prepare a research proposal, what would your hypothesis be? Why?

d) What variables are of interest to you? How will these variables help you throughout this integrated review? Be sure to label the types of variables each of these are.

e) Discuss the background and significance of the problem to healthcare administration.

III. Literature Search

a) What keywords and combinations were used in the initial search? Which were the most effective? Explain why these keywords and combinations provided the most useful results.

b) Which databases were searched? Why were these the chosen databases? Assess the characteristics that make these databases the most reliable.

c) Evaluate the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the sample. How did you decide to narrow the search and focus the review? How was the final sample determined? Be sure to include your process.

IV. Methodology Analysis

a) What methodology was used in this research? Was it effective for the research question and hypothesis? Why or why not? Consider including improvements for the methodology.

b) What statistical data analyses were employed in these articles? Were they appropriate for the research question and methodology? Why or why not?

c) Evaluate the literature for any gaps that exist. Why do you think these gaps exist? Consider factors such as the location of the research, time the research was conducted, and so on.

d) Evaluate the literature for inconsistencies that exist across the studies. Why do you think these inconsistencies exist? Consider factors such as the location of the research, time the research was conducted, and so on.

V. Synthesis and Interpretation

a) Create an evidence table of your results. Be sure to include the following criteria for each study: 1. Report citation 2. Design 3. Method 4. Sample 5. Data collection 6. Data analysis 7. Validity and reliability.

b) Compare and contrast the study findings. Be sure to include pertinent conclusions and statistical findings only.

c) Evaluate the research strategies used in the articles, as applicable to healthcare programs. Was the research design appropriate for the study conducted? Was the statistical analysis employed the best choice for the research questions posed?

d) What ethical issues are pertinent specifically to healthcare research? How can these issues influence the research strategies chosen to investigate clinical topics? Evaluate these research articles and consider how ethical concerns may have limited these clinical investigations.

e) What patterns and trends exist in the research? What generalizations can you draw from the research?

f) If secondary data was utilized, was the source biased or objective? Why? If original research was conducted, do you think the researchers were biased or objective? Why? Be sure to support your answer.

g) Synthesize the main findings of the research articles. What were the hypotheses of the research studies? Did the research add any new scholarly information to the existing body of knowledge?

h) Assess whether utilizing secondary data as an alternative to the researchers’ original research would have been a feasible option. If it had been an option, what resource(s) would be the most appropriate to use? What would be some of the strengths and limitations of using secondary data?

i) Assess the literature for any ethical concerns that may be present. Consider things such as conflicts of interest between the researcher and the study sponsors, or the lack of an IRB approval for the study.

VI. Conclusion

a) What are the studies’ strengths? Are there patterns in the articles that you chose regarding their strengths?

b) What are the studies’ limitations? Are there patterns in the articles that you chose regarding their limitations?

c) Were the findings and conclusions reliable and valid? Why or why not? Logically support your answers.

d) What are the implications of this research? How will it influence your topic in the overall large picture of healthcare research?

Paper For Above Instructions

Abstract:

The significance of program evaluation in healthcare cannot be overstated, especially in light of the increasing complexities in the healthcare delivery system. This integrated review focuses on the critical aspects of program evaluation, exploring how various factors influence the implementation of effective healthcare practices. The review draws from six peer-reviewed articles that examine the relationship between stress and mental health, and the methodologies employed in these studies to highlight the need for robust evaluation strategies in hospitals.

Introduction:

The primary objective of this integrated review is to validate the necessity for program evaluation within healthcare settings. Given the rapid evolution of medical practices and policies, it is vital to assess whether such changes yield beneficial outcomes for patient care and staff well-being. The topic of stress in healthcare professionals, particularly how it can impact mental health, is pivotal to this review. Understanding the dynamics of stress within healthcare environments serves as the focus of our investigation.

The research question guiding this review is: What are the implications of stress on the job satisfaction and mental health of healthcare professionals? The corresponding hypothesis suggests that elevated stress levels negatively influence both mental health and job satisfaction among healthcare workers. Key variables of interest include stress (independent variable), mental health (dependent variable), and job satisfaction (dependent variable). Stress levels can be assessed through various scales, while mental health can be evaluated using standardized psychological assessments.

As background, the significance of stress in the context of healthcare administration is profound. Chronic stress among healthcare workers can lead to diminished productivity, adverse patient outcomes, and increased turnover rates, ultimately affecting healthcare quality.

Literature Search:

The initial search utilized keywords such as “occupational stress,” “mental health,” “healthcare program evaluation,” and combinations of these terms. The most effective combinations included “occupational stress and mental health,” as these yielded a range of relevant articles discussing the impact of stress on professionals in healthcare settings. Databases searched included PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. These databases were selected for their extensive coverage of psychological and healthcare literature, ensuring the reliability of sourced information.

The inclusion criteria focused on articles published in the last ten years that discussed occupational stress and its consequences in healthcare, while exclusion criteria eliminated studies not based on empirical data. The final sample comprised peer-reviewed articles renowned for their methodological rigor.

Methodology Analysis:

Various methodologies used in the reviewed articles ranged from meta-analyses to cross-sectional studies. These were largely effective in addressing the research question, though some analyses could benefit from longitudinal designs to determine causality over time. Statistical data analyses employed varied from t-tests to ANOVAs, tailored to specific research questions, and were generally appropriate. Gaps in the literature include a lack of comprehensive studies focusing solely on the long-term effects of stress on job satisfaction.

Across the studies, inconsistencies were identified regarding the correlation strength between stress and mental health outcomes, potentially attributed to differences in sample sizes and demographic factors such as age and work experience.

Synthesis and Interpretation:

An evidence table capturing the findings of each study highlights their respective methodologies and results. For example, Bohlmeijer et al. (2010) focus on mindfulness-based stress reduction, finding significant effects on mental health indicative of a positive therapeutic intervention. Conversely, Cooper & Marshall (2013) emphasize the association between workplace stressors and the incidence of coronary heart disease, underscoring how occupational stress contributes to broader health outcomes.

Comparatively, while studies like that of Gu et al. (2015) emphasize cognitive interventions, others, like Mark & Smith (2012), analyze behavioral responses, highlighting the multifaceted nature of stress-related health issues. Critical evaluation of research strategies reveals that while many studies employed appropriate designs, some succumbed to limitations regarding sample diversity.

Ethical considerations are crucial in the realm of healthcare research. Issues such as informed consent and the potential for conflicts of interest must be duly acknowledged, as they can introduce bias or affect participant willingness. This review also identifies trends indicating a heightened recognition of the need for ethical standards in mental health research.

Conclusion:

This review affirms the strengths of the examined studies, which demonstrate consistent findings on the detrimental effects of stress on healthcare professionals. Limitations mostly relate to sample sizes and methodological execution. The validity and reliability of the conclusions drawn are credible, as they align with existing literature on stress and mental health.

Ultimately, the implications of this research extend beyond immediate healthcare contexts. By validating program evaluation's significance, healthcare institutions can design interventions that promote mental well-being and optimize job satisfaction, thereby enhancing overall care delivery.

References

• Bohlmeijer, E., Prenger, R., Taal, E., & Cuijpers, P. (2010). The effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction therapy on the mental health of adults with a chronic medical disease: a meta-analysis. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 68(6).
• Lupien, S. J., McEwen, B. S., Gunnar, M. R., & Heim, C. (2009). Effects of stress throughout the lifespan on the brain, behaviour, and cognition. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10(6), 434.
• Mark, G., & Smith, A. P. (2012). Effects of occupational stress, job characteristics, coping, and attributional style on the mental health and job satisfaction of university employees. Anxiety, Stress & Coping, 25(1), 63-78.
• Gu, J., Strauss, C., Bond, R., & Cavanagh, K. (2015). How do mindfulness-based cognitive therapy and mindfulness-based stress reduction improve mental health and wellbeing? A systematic review and meta-analysis of mediation studies. Clinical Psychology Review, 37, 1-12.
• Shapiro, S. L., Brown, K. W., & Biegel, G. M. (2007). Teaching self-care to caregivers: effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction on the mental health of therapists in training. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 1(2), 105.
• Cooper, C. L., & Marshall, J. (2013). Occupational sources of stress: A review of the literature relating to coronary heart disease and mental ill health. In From Stress to Wellbeing Volume 1 (pp. 3-23). Palgrave Macmillan UK.

```