Research Methods Synthesis Matrix: Your Selected Articles

Research Methods synthesis Matrixnote Your Selected Articles Will Not

Research Methods synthesis Matrixnote Your Selected Articles Will Not

Research Methods Synthesis Matrix Note: Your selected articles will not have ALL of the data, however you should complete these grid boxes as much as possible using the information provided in the peer-reviewed articles. This will help you critically evaluate and synthesize your findings. Developing your SUMMARY paragraph at the end of each section will provide the foundation for your Literature Review Paper.

Peer-Reviewed Primary Research Article #1

Peer-Reviewed Primary Research Article #2

Peer-Reviewed Primary Research Article #3

Peer-Reviewed Primary Research Article #4

Peer-Reviewed Primary Research Article #5

Article Citation

  • Wills, T. A., Knight, R., Williams, R. J., Pagano, I., & Sargent, J. D. (2015). Risk factors for exclusive e-cigarette use and dual e-cigarette use and tobacco use in adolescents. Pediatrics , 135 (1), e43-e51.
  • Rooke, C., Cunningham-Burley, S., & Amos, A. (2016). Smokers’ and ex-smokers’ understanding of electronic cigarettes: a qualitative study. Tobacco control , 25 (e1), e60-e66.
  • Hiscock, R., Bauld, L., Amos, A., & Platt, S. (2012). Smoking and socioeconomic status in England: the rise of the never smoker and the disadvantaged smoker. Journal of Public Health , .
  • Khuder, S., Price, J., Jordan, T., Khuder, S., & Silvestri, K. (2008). Cigarette smoking among adolescents in Northwest Ohio: correlates of prevalence and age at onset. International journal of environmental research and public health , 5 (4), .
  • Hossain, A., Hossain, Q. Z., & Rahman, F. (2015). Factors influencing teenager to initiate smoking in South-west Bangladesh. Universal Journal of Public Health , 3 (6), .

Week 3 Research Design

Experimental/RCT

Survey/Quasi-Experimental

Single Case Design

Qualitative Research

Participant Number (N)

Comments: Summary Paragraph

Week 4 Data Collection

Type

  • Questionnaires (Open ended, closed, Likert)
  • Interviews (In person, telephone, focus group)
  • Observation (Who are the observers; did they use an instrument?)

Measurement (Type of data collected: nominal, ordinal, interval, ratio)

Was the tool shown to be valid & reliable? Test/retest data? Comments: Summary

Week 5 Descriptive Stats

(About sample or outcome data)

How was data presented? (Pie chart, graph)

Any measures of central tendency? (Mean, median, mode)

Standard deviation (sd) or ranges of data presented?

Any correlation (relationship) of data? (r) value Comments: Summary Paragraph

Week 6 Data Analysis & Inference

Any probability data findings presented? Any confidence intervals (CI) presented? Hypothesis addressed? (Null or alternative hypothesis accepted?) Any statistical software used? (SAS, SPSS, Strata) Effect size used (if mentioned)? Power Analysis done? (used to calculate number of subjects needed) Qualitative data analysis (how data was collected, coded, software used)? Comments: Summary Paragraph

Week 7 Evaluation

Was hypothesis clear?

Was previous instrument reliability & validity provided or calculated on sample?

How were participants recruited? Were they compensated for participation?

Ethics: was the study approved by an IRB? Do you see clinical significance (benefit) to this research?

Overall Comments: (Any Future research needed)

Overall Summary:

Paper For Above instruction

The analysis of research methods in peer-reviewed articles provides crucial insights into how different studies approach investigating smoking behaviors and e-cigarette use among adolescents. The articles selected offer diverse methodological frameworks, including cross-sectional surveys, qualitative interviews, and longitudinal analyses, which together contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing tobacco use. This synthesis evaluates each article's research design, data collection, analysis methods, and overall validity, identifying strengths, limitations, and areas for future research.

In Wills et al. (2015), the authors employed a quantitative survey design with a sample of adolescents to identify risk factors for exclusive e-cigarette use and dual use with tobacco. Their use of self-reported questionnaires allowed for the collection of data related to demographic variables, substance use patterns, and contextual influences. The instrument was tested for validity and reliability through pilot testing and internal consistency measures, ensuring credible data. Descriptive statistics revealed significant associations between certain risk factors—such as peer influence and socioeconomic status—and vaping behavior. Inferential analyses, including logistic regression, further clarified the predictors of risk, with software like SPSS used for data processing. The study's hypothesis was clearly articulated, and statistical findings provided strong evidence supporting the role of specific social and environmental factors.

Rooke et al. (2016) adopted a qualitative methodology, conducting semi-structured interviews with smokers and ex-smokers to explore their understanding of electronic cigarettes. Participants were recruited through purposive sampling, ensuring a diverse representation of experiences. Data collection involved in-person interviews, which were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was employed to systematically code the data, with software like NVivo assisting in managing qualitative content. Validity was addressed through member checking and triangulation, enhancing credibility. Although no statistical measures of central tendency or correlation were presented, thematic patterns illuminated misconceptions and varied perceptions of e-cigarettes, providing rich contextual insights for future interventions.

Hiscock et al. (2012) conducted a cross-sectional survey examining smoking behaviors across different socioeconomic groups in England. Using structured questionnaires, the researchers gathered data on smoking status, frequency, and social determinants. The sample was stratified to represent various socioeconomic strata, with measures of validity established through prior validation studies. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, including means and medians, and presented via bar graphs and pie charts. Correlation analyses explored relationships between socioeconomic status and smoking prevalence, with coefficients illustrating the strength of associations. Findings highlighted rising trends of never smokers and disadvantaged smokers, emphasizing the social gradient in tobacco use.

Khuder et al. (2008) performed a cross-sectional study among adolescents in Ohio, utilizing questionnaires to collect data on smoking initiation age, prevalence, and associated factors. Data were analyzed descriptively with measures such as mean age at onset and prevalence rates, represented graphically and statistically. Validity of instruments was supported by prior research, with test-retest reliability corroborated. Findings underscored the importance of peer influence and family smoking behaviors in adolescent initiation, informing targeted prevention strategies.

Hossain et al. (2015) used a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative surveys with qualitative interviews to explore factors influencing smoking initiation among Bangladeshi teenagers. Quantitative data were analyzed for correlations using Pearson’s r, with qualitative analysis involving thematic coding supported by software like MAXQDA. Ethical considerations included IRB approval, and participant recruitment was conducted through schools with appropriate consent and compensation. The study identified key social and cultural factors affecting smoking initiation, and the combination of methods provided comprehensive insights into behavioral determinants.

Overall, the reviewed articles demonstrate a variety of research designs suited to their specific objectives, with strengths in validity and reliability testing, diverse data collection methods, and rigorous analysis techniques. However, limitations such as small sample sizes, potential biases, and cross-sectional constraints highlight avenues for further longitudinal and experimental research. These methodological considerations are vital for advancing understanding of tobacco-related behaviors among youth and informing effective intervention strategies.

References

  • Hiscock, R., Bauld, L., Amos, A., & Platt, S. (2012). Smoking and socioeconomic status in England: the rise of the never smoker and the disadvantaged smoker. Journal of Public Health.
  • Khuder, S., Price, J., Jordan, T., Khuder, S., & Silvestri, K. (2008). Cigarette smoking among adolescents in Northwest Ohio: correlates of prevalence and age at onset. International journal of environmental research and public health, 5(4), 330-339.
  • Hossain, A., Hossain, Q. Z., & Rahman, F. (2015). Factors influencing teenager to initiate smoking in South-west Bangladesh. Universal Journal of Public Health, 3(6), 267-273.
  • Rooke, C., Cunningham-Burley, S., & Amos, A. (2016). Smokers’ and ex-smokers’ understanding of electronic cigarettes: a qualitative study. Tobacco Control, 25(e1), e60-e66.
  • Wills, T. A., Knight, R., Williams, R. J., Pagano, I., & Sargent, J. D. (2015). Risk factors for exclusive e-cigarette use and dual e-cigarette use and tobacco use in adolescents. Pediatrics, 135(1), e43-e51.

Related Assignments