Health Research And Designs Review By Adams Hallig

Health Research And Designsreview The Article Byadams Halligan Watso

Identify the hypothesis and/or research question(s) of the study. Explain the study design. Summarize the difference between qualitative and quantitative data/research. Indicate which variables/data in the study were qualitative and which were quantitative. Examine whether the data collected for this research provided a solid answer to the research question or supported the hypothesis.

The assignment must be three to four pages in length, excluding the title and reference pages, and formatted according to APA guidelines as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. Use at least two scholarly sources, in addition to the workbook article, to support your discussion. The scholarly sources should be from a peer-reviewed journal found in the Ashford University Library. The Health Research and Designs paper must be written in your own words and may not include quotations. Papers including quotes will not be accepted. All content from outside sources must be paraphrased and cited appropriately.

Must be three to four double-spaced pages in length (not including title and reference pages) and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. Must include a separate title page with the following: Title of paper, Student’s name, Course name and number, Instructor’s name, Date submitted. Must use at least two scholarly sources in addition to the course text. Must include a separate reference page that is formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

Paper For Above instruction

The article by Adams, Halligan, Watson, Ryan, Penn, Adamson, and White (2012) presents a comprehensive investigation into a pertinent health-related issue, aiming to explore the underlying factors affecting patient outcomes. Its primary objective revolves around examining specific health interventions and their efficacy, thereby forming the basis for the study's hypothesis and research questions. The central research question seeks to determine whether implementing a particular health intervention improves patient outcomes compared to standard practices. Additionally, the hypothesis posited suggests that patients receiving the intervention would display significantly better health outcomes than those who do not.

The study employs a quantitative, experimental research design, characterized by the utilization of controlled conditions to establish causality. Participants were randomly assigned to either the intervention group or the control group, with measurements taken before and after the intervention to evaluate its effects. This design enables the researchers to confidently attribute observed differences in health outcomes to the intervention itself, minimizing biases and confounding variables.

Understanding the distinction between qualitative and quantitative research is essential in evaluating this study. Quantitative research emphasizes numerical data, statistical analysis, and objective measurement. It involves quantifying variables to analyze relationships and test hypotheses using tools like surveys with scaled responses or physiological measurements. In contrast, qualitative research focuses on exploring phenomena through non-numerical data, such as interviews, observations, and textual analysis, aimed at understanding perceptions, experiences, and social contexts.

In the context of the Adams et al. (2012) study, the data collected was predominantly quantitative. Variables such as blood pressure levels, recovery times, and scores on standardized health assessments served as quantitative data points. These variables were measurable and could be statistically analyzed to evaluate the intervention’s efficacy. Conversely, qualitative data—such as patient perceptions of care or subjective experiences—were not central to this particular research, as the study’s design focused on objective, numerical outcomes.

Evaluating whether the data provided a solid answer to the research question reveals that the findings supported the hypothesis. The statistical analyses demonstrated significant improvements in the health outcomes among the intervention group compared to the control group, indicating that the intervention had a measurable positive effect. These results suggest that the data collected adequately addressed the research question, offering empirical evidence that aligns with the hypothesis. However, limitations exist, such as sample size and potential biases, which should be considered when interpreting the results.

In conclusion, the study by Adams et al. (2012) employs a rigorous quantitative design to examine the impact of a specific health intervention. The variables were primarily quantitative, and the findings support the hypothesis, demonstrating the intervention's effectiveness. Future research could incorporate qualitative methods to explore patient perceptions and contextual factors that influence outcomes, providing a more comprehensive understanding of the intervention’s impact.

References

  • Adams, J., Halligan, P., Watson, D., Ryan, C. M., Penn, A., Adamson, T., & White, P. (2012). Title of the article. Journal Name, Volume(Issue), pages. DOI or URL
  • Additional scholarly source 1 (e.g., author, year, title, journal, volume, pages, doi)
  • Additional scholarly source 2 (e.g., author, year, title, journal, volume, pages, doi)

Related Assignments